[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fixes for some issues on Arm platforms (#901)

Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) notifications at github.com
Thu Oct 17 11:51:38 UTC 2019


> That's really strange given the rest of the Linux ecosystem used 5tel as there were literally no chips ever that didn't have the "enhanced DSP" option. Pity all this useful information wasn't provided in the commit message, it helps understand reasons for it.

That was in my early days of doing this kind of work, I didn't know that I could do more than `git commit -m` yet. Sorry!

> Why wasn't there attribution/sign-off by? Could someone provide more details, I want to understand the details of how this would be used. There's users of Debian packages in Fedora and in all the time we've supported aarch64 this was never requested because there's other means of dealing with this.

I'm pretty sure the armv8 commits were written by him and have his sign-off.

As for the `arm64`/`aarch64` thing, I wrote it after encountering a number of issues at work trying to deal with converting debs to rpms for AArch64 (for reasons I can't go into, unfortunately) as well as having people wanting to use the Debian arch names in spec files (because things like Go, Rust, Docker, etc. have adopted the Debian arch names instead of the RPM or gcc ones) to mean the equivalent RPM ones. Rather than trying to fight it, I just wanted to make it work.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/901#issuecomment-543138274
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20191017/df50cc40/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Rpm-maint mailing list