https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2292522
wojnilowicz <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from wojnilowicz <[email protected]> --- Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review. ✅ package builds and installs without errors on rawhide ✅ test suite is run and all unit tests pass ✅ latest version of the crate is packaged ✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora ✅ license files are included with %license in %files ✅ package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines Package APPROVED. === Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks: - set up package on release-monitoring.org: project: $crate homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate backend: crates.io version scheme: semantic version filter: alpha;beta;rc;pre distro: Fedora Package: rust-$crate - add rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer (should happen automatically) - set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional) - track package in koschei for all built branches (should happen automatically once rust-sig is co-maintainer) === Thanks for the explanations. They seem reasonable to me. What about this? (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #5) > (In reply to wojnilowicz from comment #3) > > 1) Shouldn't the following subpackage: > > > > %package -n %{name}+x86-devel > > Summary: %{summary} > > BuildArch: noarch > > > > be somehow restricted to x86_64, and not be noarch? > > No, this is not possible. > The "-devel" package must be noarch and be available on all architectures, > otherwise you get broken dependencies somewhere. > > We even have special machinery in rust2rpm for crates that only compile on > specific architectures (the "supported-arches" setting in rust2rpm.toml) > because of this. How is it different from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2276290 ? Is it because "supported-arches" there would be used for the whole crate, because the crate as a whole wouldn't work, while here it would have to be used only for a subpackage of the crate, because only this subpackage makes no sense? I would assume that's impossible to filter it out from the rpm point of view, however it's still doable to package it friction less thanks to the following note: > """ > Note that the x86 features are automatically disabled on platforms that > aren't x86 during compile time hence there is no need to disable them > explicitly if you are targeting such a platform. > """ -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2292522 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202292522%23c6 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
