New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 18:23 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:50:52 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs:
> > > > 
> > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86
> > > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64
> > > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC 
> > > > 
> > > > How should they get used?
> > > Why have users 
> > 
> > Packagers, not users.
I used the wrong word, and actually meant packagers.

> > > to cope with this at all?
> > 
> > We need the reason why a packager is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch somewhere
> > documented. Bugzilla is the right place for this IMHO.
> 
> No, the .spec file is.
> 
> Bugzilla may be used to track existing packages which are affected
> by ExcludeArch tags. But prior to that, the spec file must explain
> the reason for using ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch.
ACK.

> > > It probably wouldn't be too difficult to write script
> > 
> > The script does not know why the package is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch.
> 
> First talk about how to enter such information to a spec file,
Manually, maintainer decision.

> then talk about how a script can extract the information. ;-)

1. Build the src.rpm:
rpmbuild -bs --nodeps xxx.spec

2. Examine and process the src.rpm:
rpm -q --qf "[%{EXCLUSIVEARCH}]\n" xxx.src.rpm

Process the returned result and feed it into bugzilla.


> > >  to iterate through
> > > all *.specs or srpms and update such bugzilla PRs automatically.
> > 
> > Update??? A bug only should be filed once when the
> > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch is added -- in most cases this will
> > during/after review.
> 
> Doesn't suffice. Imagine an upstream upgrade can be built for all
> archs. Who looks up the tracker tickets in bugzilla?
Imagine the opposite: A package that once had been buildable for several
architectures, out of a sudden only builds for a subset of archs (e.g.
due to an arch-specific bug in GCC).

Ralf