Bug 145650 – rpmbuild is happy with target x86_86 (!)

Bug 145650 - rpmbuild is happy with target x86_86 (!)

Summary:	rpmbuild is happy with target x86_86 (!)

Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX

Aliases:	None

Product:	Fedora
Classification:	Fedora
Component:	rpm (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	3
Hardware:	x86_64 Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Jeff Johnson
QA Contact:	Mike McLean
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2005-01-20 09:07 EST by Horst H. von Brand
Modified:	2007-11-30 17:10 EST (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-01-20 13:11:38 EST
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Horst H. von Brand 2005-01-20 09:07:01 EST

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5)
Gecko/20041111 Firefox/1.0

Description of problem:
By mistake, I said:

   rpmbuild --rebuild --target x86_86 milter-greylist-1.7.4-1.src.rpm

and sure enough, got a package under RPMS/x86_86.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.3.2-21

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. rpmbuild --rebuild --target x86_86 milter-greylist-1.7.4-1.src.rpm
2.
3.
    

Actual Results:  Got a x86_86 package

Expected Results:  Error message: "No such architecture." Or at least
"Can't build for that architecture"

Additional info:

Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2005-01-20 13:11:38 EST

you are assuming that there are deep semantic interpretations
to rpm's interpretation of arch. this is demonstrably not true, 
as rpm already has 6 too many ppc* architectures than objectively
necessary.

so if you want to build for x86_86 (or amd64 or pentium5 or any
other arch string), have at!

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.