On Mon, Oct 15, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Sunday 14 October 2007 21:39:44 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Oct 14 2007 21:12, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > >On Sunday 14 October 2007 12:55, Pascal Bleser wrote: > > >> Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > >> > Why not fix this rpm defect instead? This limitation really doesn't > > >> > make sense. > > >> > > >> You have a patch to discuss with Jeff ? :) > > > > > >No, but didn't Jan say he'd volunteer to write one? ;-) > > > > I thought Novell was comitted to opensource? > > Yes, and not only to this particular problem. In fact the reason why this > problem hasn't been fixed yet is that there are too many other open problems > which have higher priority, and so nobody got to this one, yet. We are not > acting as we do out of ill will, but because of limited resources. I hope you > can appreciate that.
I think this idea was already rejected upstream, since RPM has no chance to make sure that the content is really noarch. If you build a normal noarch package, all arch specific commands like "ifarch" are disabled and will be ignored. How to do that for a subpackage? Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Project Manager/Release Manager SLES SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
