[pacman-dev] [PATCH 03/11] makepkg: do not attempt to strip arch agnostic packages

Dan McGee dpmcgee at gmail.com
Thu Jun 17 11:26:43 EDT 2010

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Andres P <aepd87 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is one of those "seems like a good idea but why" patches. Yes,
>> we'll save milliseconds in building a package, but what if someone has
>> a legit reason for putting libraries or binaries in an 'any' package?
>> I'm going to -1 this one.
> But "any" means that there's no arch dependant code in the package?

No, it means the package is able to be installed on any architecture
and work as intended. What if I had an "elf-demo" package that
contained different ELF files from multiple architectures? Yes,
contrived, but possible.

> strip(1) can't take the debug symbols out of a .py last time I checked.
> Seems like there's no organization. :/


> Even namcap should throw an error if it finds an elf in an "-any" package.

It does, and I wrote the damn rule. But that is not for makepkg to
decide. http://projects.archlinux.org/namcap.git/commit/?id=a121258fc2be1df8f970e09cbff889241462e491

> To think I was going to propose /libexec

Seriously, your attitude is going to get you nowhere on this list. We
appreciate your patches, but you can't throw a fit every time we say
something negative. I don't even know what points you are trying to
make or what agenda you are trying to push on a completely different

Address the issue your patch brings up, address the comments people
give, but don't start spewing everything else, please.


More information about the pacman-dev mailing list