Re: [HEADSUP] Please try to build your packages for 64 bit

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Apr 23 12:12, marco atzeri wrote:
> On 4/23/2013 10:37 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
> >
> >I still think it would make sense to name the packages according to
> >their architecture in future:
> >
> >   foo-1.0-1.i686.tar.bz2
> >   bar-2.3-4.x86_64.tar.bz
> >   baz-5.0-8.noarch.tar.bz2
> 
> no objection
> 
> >We should also find a simply mechanism to share the noarch packages
> >between the i686 and x86_64 release area, either by adding a noarch
> >dir or by automatic copying or linking the files (or parent dirs)
> >between the i686 and x86_64 release areas.
> 
> this will require syncronization between the two versions
> and it is unlikely to happen anytime soon

But isn't that what noarch packages are about?  Since they are
architecture-independent you can easily share them.  Or do you have an
example where we must have different versions of a noarch package in the
i686 and the x86_64 release?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat