On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 8:44 AM Pablo Sebastián Greco
<pablo(a)fliagreco.com.ar> wrote:
El 7/8/19 a las 12:30, Stephen John Smoogen escribió:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 10:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> Hello all.
>
> While building my Fedora packages for EPEL8, got a very strange error on
> aarch64 and s390x architectures:
>
> No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(pidgin)'
>
> But it builds fine with the same SPEC on x86_64 and ppc64le.
>
OK so it turns out that RHEL-8 is NOT 1:1 across platforms. For some reason desktop is
only on x86_64 and ppc64le and s390/aarch64 are a more limited set of packages. I
don't know if this was the case with the beta's and I missed it or if this was
something done between the beta and the final.
At this point, i am going to say that ExclusiveArch:x86_64,ppc64le will be needed for
most desktop/graphical utilities.
Smooge, can we ask to add %{arm} to those ExclusiveArch?
O in fact, go the ExcludeArch route?
That will do my armhfp rebuild much simpler.
I don't think Smooge was saying that EPEL8 would have a build policy
for ExclusiveArch, he was meaning that package maintainers would need
to put that in their spec file.
Ahh .... and now I see what you mean. You are asking the package
maintainers to put %{arm} in.
OK, I just put it on the packages I have been working on.
Also, here is the EPEL issue about this problem
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/66
And the Beta was the same way as this. But I personally, never tested
the desktop on s390x or aarch64. So I never noticed.
Troy