[Buildroot] [PATCH 3/3] package/rpm: introduce rpm2archive option

[James Knight]

Arnout,

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 4:33 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout at mind.be> wrote:
> Why would you
> not include rpm2archive? If it doesn't take a lot of additional space, there's
> really no need to make it an option.

There was not a specific reason for making this an option other than
providing developers more flexibility in their build process (maybe
shaving the (milli)seconds off a build and lazily avoiding the need to
manually exclude the option from a target, if someone does not want
said executable on a target).

I think the only main advantage from this patch is easily presenting
to a developer why "rpm2archive" may not be available, if they
need/want it.

I would have no problem with removing the option later, if it was
decided that it would be easier (for maintenance/etc.) to move back to
the automatically-build-it-if-libarchieve-is-available approach.