Theodore Papadopoulo wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 14:11 +0200, Theodore Papadopoulo wrote:
>
>> Since the library does not contain C source code, I followed the
>> noarch packaging guidelines,
>> but rpmbuild insists on creating an x86-64 rpm.
>>
>
> Do you have: BuildArch: noarch
>
> in your spec?
>
No, but then most python stuff does not have it either (ie use the
directives specified for noarch builds, but do not specify BuildArch:
noarch).
I took one of the fedora python package as a model, and then verifyed
that a lot of the python packages that install in /usr/lib/python*
are in this case (as of FC7). Even the template specs for python do not
show the BuildArch: noarch, that may be where it comes
from.
It's a small inconsistence (not very important in practise, I guess), I
just wanted to signal it...
Thank you for your quick answer. For myself, I'll add the noarch tag.
This seems cleaner.
Could you please tell us what the packages you looked at are? They are
doing things wrong.
And could you tell me which pages you would have expected to mention
BuildArch: noarch? We probably assume that people understand what
BuildArch is for and so we neglected to document it unambiguously.
-Toshio