Re: Conduit arch dependence, redux

[Ken VanDine <ken vandine org>]

Ah, I read that the opposite.  I don't have strong beliefs one way or
the other then, our build system automatically produces all the arches
so it is no more work either way.  

I know if we went to python-setuptools it has some notion of pure
python, perhaps that is the right answer.

--Ken

On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 10:22 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 13:08 -0400, Ken VanDine wrote:
> > Our conary packages for conduit in Foresight work fine.  Our libs go in
> > libdir as well, (/usr/lib,/usr/lib64) and works fine.  I don't have to
> > do anything special for the package to install properly, autotools is
> > doing the right thing.  Also my pkgconfig file gets installed in libdir
> > as it should, /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/conduit.pc
> > 
> > Not sure why you aren't seeing the same thing.
> 
> Obviously I didn't explain clearly enough. :)
> 
> I can leave it unmodified and it will work fine. However, I then have to
> make it a regular, archified package with an i586 version and an x86_64
> version. This is silly because the app itself is not archified - it's
> all pure Python. But if I want to make it a noarch package - which is
> what you're supposed to do with noarch code - I have to make the
> modifications, otherwise if it happened to get built on an x86-64
> buildhost the files would go to /usr/lib64 and the package would be
> unusable on an i586 machine.
> 
> Is that clearer? :)