Mailinglist Archive: yast-devel (191 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [yast-devel] extra-packages
  • From: Michal Svec <msvec@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:57:21 +0100 (CET)
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803212153350.10465@xxxxxxxxx>

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Lukas Ocilka wrote:

Lukas Ocilka napsal(a):
Andreas Jaeger napsal(a):
Lukas Ocilka <lukas.ocilka@xxxxxxx> writes:
But finally I've found that some currently NOARCH packages use several
"#if defined(__$arch__)" in that extra-packages file. So moving the
content to "Suggests: $package" would mean transforming some NOARCH
packages to architecture-dependent just because of suggested packages :(
Are those requirements still current and correct? Could you give us the
list, please?

File attached.

For simplicity only those "Suggested:$packagename" that are marked
architecture-dependent are listed there. For instance yast2-installation
has some more but they appear to be NOARCH, so they don't change anything.

NOARCH YaST packages affected:
* yast2-installation
* yast2-samba-client
* yast2-kerberos-client

Hmm, while checking the list ... I've realized that, for instance, those
packages listed for yast2-installation should go somewhere else.

* Bootloader (milo, aboot, cpml_ev5, cpml_ev6)
* Base pattern (sudo)
* Enhanced base PPC patterm (ibmsis, scsi, mouseemu, pbbuttonsd,
powerprefs, mol, powerpc-utils)
* ... no idea for (fpswa, numactl)

Does this actually matter? What would happen if we have Suggests to
a package which is not available?

I mean to have Suggests:milo in bootloader despite it's noarch could
possibly have no harm on architectures which do not have that package
(in a theoretical situation we actually use Suggests for anything).

To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: yast-devel+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups