Re: [RFC] cygport: arch-specific workdir

[Ken Brown <kbrown at cornell dot edu>]

On 3/27/2014 4:01 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Yaakov (Cygwin/X) writes:
> > > Actually, that is experimental code (based on a request from another
> > > cygport user) that was accidentally shipped when I had to reroll the
> > > source tarball for compatibility with F20/UnversionedDocDirs.  Would
> > > people like to see this done always, never, or only when cross-building?
> >
> > There hasn't been much comment on this.  Since it would be a visible
> > change for package maintainers, I would appreciate more of a
> > consensus. Are there any objections to making the workdir always
> > arch-specific (IOW name-ver-rel.arch)?
>
> I would rather have {build,inst,dist}/<arch> directories inside the
> workdir so the same package could build for both x86 and x86_64 in one
> workdir.

That would be inconvenient for the situation where you have to do a new 
build (and bump the release number) for only one arch.  Also, there 
might be arch-specific patches, requiring arch-specific src and origsrc 
directories, so you don't really save any disk space by having a common 
workdir.

Ken