[Fedora-packaging] To noarch or arch for arch specific script packages?

[Jesse Keating]

On Wednesday 12 July 2006 06:14, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Else it would be abuse of tags. The only vaguely valid case is combining
> BuildArch noarch and ExcludeArch, which is like saying "by nature, the
> package contents are arch-independent, but we know that there is a problem
> on the N excluded archs".

How far do you take this though?

ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 s390 s390x alpha sparc sparc64 ia64 arm .....

It starts to get silly when you have to guess at the arches that somebody may 
attempt to install your package for.  Why would 'ExcludeArch' be ok, 
but 'ExclusiveArch' not be?  ExclusiveArch says "I know it _only_ works here, 
nowhere else." where as ExcludeArch would be "These are the arches out in the 
world  I know of, and I know it doesn't work there."

I agree that we are overloading the tag.  But if we're going to ban one 
method, we should ban them all and make it a hard rule that if your noarch 
code only works on specific arches, make it an arch specific package.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060712/9dff7833/attachment.sig>