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

Re: rpms/powertop/devel powertop-1.2-install-man-page.patch, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.3, 1.4 powertop.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.3, 1.4 powertop-1.1-build-fixes.patch, 1.1, NONE



On 15.05.2007 19:04, Michael E Brown wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:40:59AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 17:14 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 09:01:41AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>>> Author: ajax
>>>> +	mkdir -p ${DESTDIR}${MANDIR}
>>>> +	cp powertop.1 ${DESTDIR}${MANDIR}
>>> cp -p would keep timestamps. Maybe not worth it if powertop.1 is
>>> generated, I haven't checked...
>> It isn't.  Why would I care about timestamp?
> Packaging guidelines state that it is preferrable to keep timestamps on
> installed files the same as what was packaged.

Well, to give a better reasons than "because it's written": for multilib
installs it's important that the timestamps are identical for files that
are in both the i386 and x86_64 packages.

And (in the long term) making sure the timestamp didn't get changed
might make things easier for presto as well.

Cu
thl


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