On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:37:17 -0600 Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 1:46 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:

...

On 25/01/10 17:41, Jan de Groot wrote:

...

On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 12:13 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:

...

linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1   - convert to arch=any  (built on x86_64, tested on i686)

[...] Good point.  I had thought about this and decided that they we architecture independent on the architectures we support so went with arch=any.  Should I revert that?

A comment in the PKGBUILD would probably be nice even if you don't revert it alluding to the above. That way anyone trying to do some abs cross-compile could at least have something to go off of. However, with that logic, making it not arch-independent would help them even more...

-Dan

+1 for not arch-independent Community projects for different architectures are coming up all the time. Also, ARM is gaining a stronghold on netbooks, a perfect target for Arch. ARM might very well become a new official architecture in a few years, if it really takes of (the way I hope :)). Why introduce (subtle) stumbling blocks to save less than 1M on mirrors? Jinks