Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar <dimstar@opensuse.org> writes:
On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 11:19 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 06.12.22 10:50, Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote:
think RPM should also gain some support as it should not just call the arch x86_64 in this case, but differentiate between the subsets we would build for.
Requires: cpufeatures(cx16, avx512, xyz)
in all packages? And in the worst case some "aaa_base-arch-x86_64-v3" package that provides this in the beginning, later maybe rpm can get this automatically?
Nothing will stop the installation of such a baseline package, and on the other hand probably nothing will pull it in if the user does not do it - as zypper does not have a clue about subarchs (yet).
And besides that, it would still give us two packages with the exact same name in the repo as the rpm would still be called NVR.x86_64.rpm; for this, rpm would need to learn about it (or we rename all packages to N_v3-V-R.x86_64.rpm for that - which in turn requires creating _multibuild for everything (to add a second flavor, as a 2nd repo would use the same names) and manual overrides of the optflags (of course via macros).
There's been a bit of discussion around supporting sub-architectures in RPM (e.g. [1]), but I haven't seen any clear progress in this regard. Introducing hacks like _multibuild for many packages will unfortunately further degrade the packager UX, which I'd like to avoid. Cheers, Dan Footnotes: [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2140 -- Dan Čermák <dcermak@suse.com> Software Engineer Development tools SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Frankenstrasse 146 90461 Nürnberg Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman