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

Re: Opinions: Providing "buildsys-macros" in the installed system

On 29.03.2007 04:29, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 19:34 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> In our buildsystem we use a 'buildsys-macros' package that defines some things 
>>> during the package builds, like the definition of %{dist}, and of %{fedora} 
>>> or %{rhel}.  Now we're talking about adding even more macros to add 
>>> convenience for packagers that are packaging the same thing for multiple 
>>> Fedora releases and RHEL releases (Hurray EPEL!).
>>> However, with more of these macros in use, the usage case of rebuilding the 
>>> srpms on your local system starts to get harder, as these macros will be 
>>> undefined and you'll have interesting results.  Perhaps surprising results.  
>>> I propose we ship these macros in something like redhat-rpm-config for each 
>>> release, so that when somebody is rebuilding a package on their system, the 
>>> macros are defined correctly for whatever release they are running.  If they 
>>> are rebuilding for another release/distribution, they really should be using 
>>> mock, and having redhat-rpm-config define the right things within their mock 
>>> chroot.
>>> In the past I remember there being resistance to shipping these on the 
>>> installed system, however my Test3 addled brain is not able to recall what 
>>> those are.  Are there any differing opinions on this matter, anybody that 
>>> disagrees with me?  I'd love to hear it and thought out reasons against 
>>> taking the step.
>> FWIW, I think this is a good idea. 
> I like it too.

/me, too, for exactly this reason:

> I can think of at least one popular 3rd-party repo that 
> gets knocked from time to time because people can't rebuild many of its 
> packages w/o hunting down some macros...


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