6:34 a.m.
CCing rpmfusion-developers, because it might be relevant for other
packages and packagers as well.
On 21.07.2008 01:12, buildsys(a)rpmfusion.org wrote:
126 (zsnes): Build on target fedora-8-rpmfusion_free succeeded.
Build logs may be found at
http://buildsys.rpmfusion.org/logs/fedora-8-rpmfusion_free/126-zsnes-1.51...
zsnes.spec contains the line:
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}
That is bad, as plague (just like koji sometimes did in the past) as a
consequence builds the package for i386, i486, i586, i686 and athlon;
see http://193.28.235.60/free/fedora/updates/testing/9/i386/
I suppose that's unwanted? Then something like
ExclusiveArch: i386 x86_64
or
ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 ia64
should prevent that in the future.
CU
knurd
6:48 a.m.
New subject: Build Result: 126 - zsnes on fedora-8-rpmfusion_free
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
CCing rpmfusion-developers, because it might be relevant for other
packages and packagers as well.
On 21.07.2008 01:12, buildsys(a)rpmfusion.org wrote:
> 126 (zsnes): Build on target fedora-8-rpmfusion_free succeeded.
> Build logs may be found at
> http://buildsys.rpmfusion.org/logs/fedora-8-rpmfusion_free/126-zsnes-1.51...
>
zsnes.spec contains the line:
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}
That is bad, as plague (just like koji sometimes did in the past) as a
consequence builds the package for i386, i486, i586, i686 and athlon;
see http://193.28.235.60/free/fedora/updates/testing/9/i386/
I suppose that's unwanted? Then something like
ExclusiveArch: i386 x86_64
or
ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 ia64
Actually I think ExclusiveArch: i386 would then be correct, but it may need to
be something like:
ExclusiveArch: i586, Andrea, do you know what the minimum CPU requirements for
zsnes are?
Thl,
We have quite a few of these packages in rpmfusion (emulators who use asm
intensively and thus are x86 only) I would like to see these show up in the
x86_64 repo too. I guess the push scripts currently don't handle this?
No hurry, please consider this an RFE.
Regards,
Hans
4:29 p.m.
New subject: multilib packages (was: Re: Build Result: 126 - zsnes on fedora-8-rpmfusion_free)
On 21.07.2008 08:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
[...]
We have quite a few of these packages in rpmfusion (emulators who use asm
intensively and thus are x86 only) I would like to see these show up in the
x86_64 repo too. I guess the push scripts currently don't handle this?
The push scripts (we use the same as EPEL, which are newer variants of
those which were used for Fedora Extras) can handle that, but it's a
whitelist iirc.
IOW: send be a list of binary package names (separated into free and
nonfree please, as different scripts are used) and I'll add them; then
everything should just work automatically in the future.
Cu
knurd
9:12 a.m.
New subject: multilib packages (was: Re: Build Result: 126 - zsnes on fedora-8-rpmfusion_free)
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:29:35 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 21.07.2008 08:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
> [...]
>
> We have quite a few of these packages in rpmfusion (emulators who use asm
> intensively and thus are x86 only) I would like to see these show up in the
> x86_64 repo too. I guess the push scripts currently don't handle this?
The push scripts (we use the same as EPEL, which are newer variants of
those which were used for Fedora Extras) can handle that, but it's a
whitelist iirc.
Yes, the multilibwhitelist can do that and accepts regexp patterns (as that
is the way to add .*-devel compatarch packages e.g.).
Btw, if the scripts are the same as EPEL, try "cvs up MultiLib.py" to get
an update. With it, ppc repos can be configured for ppc64 biarch pushes.
And the multilib resolver is improved (basearch main pkgs now are
sufficient, compatarch main pkgs are only pulled in if there is a strict
dependency or if a compatarch dependency is considered "better" by Yum).
7:37 p.m.
New subject: multilib packages
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 21.07.2008 08:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
> [...]
>
> We have quite a few of these packages in rpmfusion (emulators who use
> asm intensively and thus are x86 only) I would like to see these show
> up in the x86_64 repo too. I guess the push scripts currently don't
> handle this?
The push scripts (we use the same as EPEL, which are newer variants of
those which were used for Fedora Extras) can handle that, but it's a
whitelist iirc.
IOW: send be a list of binary package names (separated into free and
nonfree please, as different scripts are used) and I'll add them; then
everything should just work automatically in the future.
Heres an initial list of i386 only packages which should be copied to the
x86_64 tree:
unace
zsnes
mupen64
mupen64-ricevideo
Regards,
Hans
5:34 p.m.
New subject: multilib packages
On 25.07.2008 21:37, Hans de Goede wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 21.07.2008 08:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
> [...]
> IOW: send be a list of binary package names (
> separated into free and nonfree please,
^^^^^^^^
;-)
> as different scripts are used) and I'll add them; then
> everything should just work automatically in the future.
Heres an initial list of i386 only packages which should be copied to the
x86_64 tree:
unace
zsnes
mupen64
mupen64-ricevideo
Added. After the next push (it should be the first one where a
announcement mail to this list will be sent) please check that it works
as expected. tia!
Cu
knurd
5740
days inactive
5751
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Hans de Goede -
Michael Schwendt -
Thorsten Leemhuis