[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: python noarch vs arch



On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 17:29 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 05:15:05PM +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 17:01 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 04:34:49PM +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> > > > I am working on packaging cohoba, this is a python gui client/mission
> > > > control for telepathy. It has one small .c file, so I have a few
> > > > questions:
> > > > - because of the .c file the package has to by arch-specific i guess. Is
> > > > there a strong preference to package as noarch?
> > > 
> > > No, on the contrary packaging binary bits as noarch is wrong.
> > 
> > yes i understand that, that's why i asked if there was a strong
> > preference for noarch, in which case the c part will be removed.
> 
> You shouldn't make the contents of your packages depend on the arch
> tag, it's the other way around. :)
> 
> If you are talking about a package of significant size (like
> openoffice ;) and you could easily replace (or drop w/o loss of
> functionality) the arch-dependent parts to make it noarch and thus
> save some significant space, then you could think about it.
> 
> But it's a packager's (your) choice, noone can give you metrics on
> size and functionality to weigh against. If in doubt prefer
> functionality over space savings.

Ok, I was just wondering if there might be some big advantages having a
package noarch. I guess now that the advantages are not big enough to
spend time on. Thank you and Jesse for answering, and sorry for the
confusion followed after my question.

Sander


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]