Inconsistency between RPM and DEB build architectures?

[dgersting]

I might be mistaken, but I feel there's an inconsistency between the RPM and DEB build architectures.

For RPM builds: https://github.com/aws/efs-utils/blob/87874bd1a18a262fdcb1264f9bc0b8e4b8a77bd6/amazon-efs-utils.spec#L52

For DEB builds: https://github.com/aws/efs-utils/blob/87874bd1a18a262fdcb1264f9bc0b8e4b8a77bd6/dist/amazon-efs-utils.control#L2

Since efs-utils is compiled w/ Rust, wouldn't the DEB build need to target specific architectures as all would "indicate an architecture-independent package" based on the Debian control file spec?

References:

• https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-architecture

[dgersting]

Oh, I just noticed there's an open pull request from April which addresses this very issue: https://github.com/aws/efs-utils/pull/211

[anthotse]

We've merged in #211. This is now fixed.