Re: rpms/VirtualBox/F-18 VirtualBox.spec, 1.17, 1.18 vboxweb.service, 1.1, 1.2

On Sáb, 2012-09-15 at 09:32 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > 2012/9/15 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt;: > > On Sex, 2012-09-14 at 19:05 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > >> 2012/9/13 Sérgio M. Basto <sergiomb(a)rpmfusion.org&gt;: > ... > >> What does this 32bit support stands for ? Because usually we copy the > >> produced binary -libs sub-package from the "native" 32bit tree to the > >> x86_64 tree. > >> This is done automatically by the multilib script from the infra side. > > > > VirtualBox for x86_64 on configure test if have 32-bit support , > > Checking for 32-bit support: OK. (on my mock build). > > > > and we patch the ./configure to not check that because it fails. I just > > want remove that patch and let VirtualBox configure him self without > > patching, seems to me better and closer to upstream, since it works on > > my mock builds. > If it's only a test, there is no need to worry, you can create a > disable 32bit test and submit it upstream. > But you seems to say that there are no 32bit binaries produced > elsewhere ? What this test is useful for ? Hi, it wasn't easy (for me) update patches to VirtualBox 4.2 , in middle of the process, some errors occurred about 32bit binaries ... I'm not worried about it, simple is more simple build the package without the patch ... VirtualBox-4.2.0 is out , can I update it on F17 ?