https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341662
--- Comment #16 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <[email protected]> --- (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #15) > New SPEC: > https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/fedora-developer- > portal/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00583062-fedora-developer-portal/fedora- > developer-portal.spec > > New SRPM: > https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/fedora-developer- > portal/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00583062-fedora-developer-portal/fedora- > developer-portal-0.9.4-0.1.git167ae09.fc27.src.rpm > > I've bundled few gems to mitigate rubygem-therubyracer not being built and > maintained in latest Fedoras. I think bundling only for build time is OK. Sounds reasonable. > The other option would be to patch upstream jekyll-lunr-js-search to rely > for JS on rubygem-execjs instead of rubygem-therubyracer or strip out search > completely (which is broken right now anyway in packaged version). > > Regarding building the noarch package in Fedora infra - can I rely on x86_64 > builder or not? Cause bundled libv8 is architecture-specific (and %ifarch > didn't work for me in mock, probably because of noarch package) For a noarch package, you cannot rely on a specific builder architecture, unless you use ExclusiveArch. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js#ExclusiveArch. I think those instructions there should work for this case too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
