rpms/moc/F-20 .cvsignore, 1.5, 1.6 moc.spec, 1.4, 1.5 sources, 1.5, 1.6

[Rex Dieter]

On 08/31/2014 04:02 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/30/2014 03:43 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>> 2014-08-30 15:20 GMT+02:00 Antonio <sagitter at rpmfusion.org
>> <mailto:sagitter at rpmfusion.org>>:
>>
>> Author: sagitter
>>
>> Update of /cvs/free/rpms/moc/F-20 In directory
>> old02.ovh.rpmfusion.lan:/tmp/cvs-serv12275/F-20
>>
>> Modified Files: .cvsignore moc.spec sources Log Message: Update to
>> new stable release 2.5.0 .
>>
>>
>> ..
>>
>> ## Source archive from svn #2641; obtained by: ## svn co
>> svn://daper.net/moc/trunk <http://daper.net/moc/trunk> -## tar
>> -czvf  moc-2.5.0-14.beta2.tar.gz trunk -Source0:
>> %{name}-%{version}-14.beta2.tar.gz +## tar -czvf
>> moc-2.5.0-17.beta2.tar.gz trunk +## Source0:
>> %%{name}-%%{version}-17.beta2.tar.gz + +Source0:
>> http://ftp.daper.net/pub/soft/moc/stable/moc-2.5.0.tar.bz2
>>
>> version macro.
>>
>>
>> +%ifnarch armv6hl armv7hl +BuildRequires: ffmpeg-devel
>> +BuildRequires: libmad-devel +%endif
>>
>>
>> At least you can use %{arm} architectural macro, but can you
>> explain why it would not be enabled on ARM ? At least it does build
>> perfecly fine until now.
>>
>
>
> They're related to RPMs built outside RPMFusion, but for Pidora.

Pidora supports armv7hl these days?

Regardless, the primary target for this .spec should be rpmfusion.  Is 
there reason to omit this on fedora/rpmfusion?

-- Rex