[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RPM roadmapping



On Sun, 28 Jul 2007, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

"DP" == Dimi Paun <dimi lattica com> writes:

DP> My proposal is to implement this where it belongs (in rpmbuild),

I can't disagree with that.

DP> and issue warnings (and ignore) any attempt to set the build root
DP> or to rm -rf it from within the spec.

I must disagree with that; these statements will be required for
compatibility with old versions of RPM (see EPEL4) for many years to
come.  I don't particularly want to fork a different version of my
specfiles when there's no need.

Welcome to world of rpm: people want progress but no change.

See the discussion regarding setting a sane default buildroot: https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-maint/2007-February/000162.html Lots of talk, no real consensus was reached because changing it one way or the other breaks compatibility for somebody.

Maybe these things would need a new incompatible "spec 2" format (one that actually has defined grammar etc) that fixes various insanities in the current non-format and forces people to fork the specs for good :)

	- Panu -


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]