Bug 16348

Summary:	Can't build <arch> and noarch packages at the same time
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Horst H. von Brand <vonbrand>
Component:	rpm	Assignee:	Jeff Johnson <jbj>
Status:	CLOSED DEFERRED	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	7.0	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2000-08-16 14:51:34 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Horst H. von Brand 2000-08-16 14:51:32 UTC

Some packages I've created here have extensive documentation, which
logically falls into the "noarch" cathegory. I've been unable to create
package.<arch>.rpm and package-docs.noarch.rpm out of the same spec file.
Possibly just because I'm dumb ;-)

Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2000-08-16 14:59:59 UTC

All sub-packages of a single spec file must be in the same arch (i.e. only one
arch is
permitted during a single spec file parse and build).

The easiest fix is to split the doco into a separate package. More complicated
is to
write a meta spec file that does two builds with two included spec files.

Comment 2 Pavel Roskin 2001-01-10 22:00:28 UTC

Perhaps RPM needs another keyword to indicate that a package (or a subpackage)
is architecture-independent.

The current situation is that building a noarch package is building for another
architecture.

Building for i386 and noarch on i386 is for RPM something like building for i386
and alpha on i386, i.e. compilation for two architectures in a single build.
That's why RPM cannot do it.

But this should be fixed. There are many examples in RedHat-7.0 where separate
source packages were created to work around this bug, e.g.:

XFree86-KOI8-R-1.0-2.src.rpm
gimp-data-extras-1.1.20-3.src.rpm
sgml-common-0.1-10.src.rpm

Comment 3 H. Peter Anvin 2002-05-06 06:26:37 UTC

I just ran into the same problem.  I think this is highly undesirable.  In fact,
this doesn't just apply to the noarch architecture -- it should at least be
theoretically possible to have a package that produces multiple architectures
from the same source.