arch inspection incorrectly requires "noarch" in ExclusiveArch for BuildArch: noarch packages

[dsoumis]

When a package uses BuildArch: noarch combined with ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches} (which expands to aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64 riscv64), the arch inspection reports:

expected ExclusiveArch "aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64 riscv64 noarch" but was "aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64 riscv64"

This appears to require noarch to be explicitly listed in ExclusiveArch. However, RPM itself no longer requires this, since it was fixed in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298668, which allows noarch packages to build even when noarch is not in ExclusiveArch.

The arch inspection should not flag this as an error when the package already has BuildArch: noarch.

Package: tomcat (Fedora rawhide)
Spec excerpt:
BuildArch: noarch
ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches}

[mkoncek]

Interesting, I will check it myself.
Which Fedora releases is this RPM feature implemented in?

[dsoumis]

It's currently in rawhide.

[mizdebsk]

Java packaging guidelines require noarch to be included in ExclusiveArch in this case.

Packages that build only noarch sub-packages MUST use ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches} noarch.

From https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Java/#_architecture_support

If you believe that this is incorrect then Java packaging guidelines should be updated first, then we can update the validator check accordingly.

[dsoumis]

Packages that include architecture-dependent build artifacts (i.e. [Packaging JAR files that use JNI](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Java/#JNI) modules) MUST use ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches}.

The tomcat package includes tomcat-jni.jar, which is a JAR file that uses JNI modules, making it an architecture-dependent build artifact. This is without noarch. So the current spec using ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches} should be correct per the Java packaging guidelines.

[mizdebsk]

Tomcat builds only noarch pacakges. So ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches} is wrong and it should be ExclusiveArch: %{java_arches} noarch per packaging guidelines. The validator check failure is correct in this case.

[mkoncek]

It would be worth discussing whether the change in RPM does not introduce unforeseen issues. If not I am in favor of changing the Guidelines and simplifying the ExclusiveArch field.