Bug 604661

Summary: spice-xpi: need to build package for 32 bit too (i686)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Uri Lublin <uril>
Component: spice-xpiAssignee: Uri Lublin <uril>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Desktop QE <desktop-qa-list>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 6.0CC: cmeadors, jrb, tpelka, vbenes
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: spice-xpi-2.3-0.3.fc13 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-06-30 16:22:45 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 Uri Lublin 2010-06-16 12:59:06 UTC 
Description of problem:
Currently the RHEL-6 spice-xpi package is built only for x86_64.
We need to build it for i686 too.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
spice-xpi-2.3-0.2.el6

Additional info:
The following change in the spec file should enable 32 bit builds:
- ExclusiveArch:  x86_64 i386
+ ExclusiveArch:  x86_64 i686
Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2010-06-16 13:12:54 UTC 
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux major release.  Product Management has requested further
review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux Major release.  This request is not yet committed for
inclusion.
Comment 3 Jonathan Blandford 2010-06-16 19:32:37 UTC 
Easy fix.  Lets try to get this in for Snap7
Comment 5 Vladimir Benes 2010-06-30 15:51:17 UTC 
fixed in field says: spice-xpi-2.3-0.3.fc13

shouldn't it be el6?

still cannot see spice-xpi neither in i686 compose nor brew 

see: http://download/rel-eng/RHEL6.0-preBeta2-1/6.0/Client/i386/os/Packages/

http://download.englab/rel-eng/RHEL6.0-preBeta2-1/6.0/Client/i386/os/Packages/
Comment 6 Tomas Pelka 2010-06-30 16:22:45 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 552646 ***