https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025124
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com> ---
Thank you for the feedback,
I am learning some new tricks :-)
I made almost all the requested changes, please take a look.
Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frostyx/qtile/fedora-r...
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frostyx/qtile/fedora-r...
Diff:
https://github.com/frostyx/rpmbuild-topdir/commit/9cec169
There were two problems though.
1. When I started removing the explicit BuildRequires, tests started
falling. Do you think, we are installing the generated dependencies
incorrectly? Also, just for the record, I am fine with having explicit
BuildRequires :-)
2. Wayland support requires much more work than I can allocate to it
right now. There are the missing dependencies, and also tests started
failing for some reason. I would like to keep the Wayland-specific
changes in a WIP state and iteratively fix them one by one.
Not a correction but just a curiosity on my part, what changes when
enabling Wayland support to switch the package from noarch to being
architecture specific?
I am curious about this as well. Builds started failing with a
message, that I use `BuildArch: noarch` for an architecture-specific
package. So I added the condition to fix the issue, but I don't quite
understand why it started building architecture-specific RPMs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025124