https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |POST
Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #26 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> ---
So I went on a longish roundabout hike after looking an the Provides and ended
up filing #1618949 and #1618951. It seems that this package is not at fault,
but the automatic dependency generator is too eager in one case and not eager
enough in another.
> Should we exclude some arches?
If you *have* to, for example because they aren't supported upstream or tests
fail or whatever, then sure. But otherwise, everything should be compiled for
all architectures. You're right that arm probably isn't an option, but somebody
might be running small stuff on a chromebook. Arm64 is also getting more
viable.
Looks all good to me. I gave it some light testing, and everything seems to
work fine. I already listed license and other checks above in #c23.
Package is APPROVED.
--
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 -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/SVFWVAKIP4XAC7LTWMA4FECEZRSKNCMN/
