UTF-8 specfiles, better upstream tarball commits coming

[Ville Skyttä]

On Monday 10 August 2009, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Ville Skyttä (ville.skytta at iki.fi) said:
> > I ran a few scripts on the CVS tree and will commit the resulting
> > improvements in a few days to devel and rebuild changed packages if ACL's
> > allow.  Let me know if you for some reason don't want your packages
> > touched (affected package lists below).
>
> If I may ask - is there a reason to do rebuilds? Given that there's
> no functional differences, isn't having the changes in CVS for the
> next rebuild 'good enough'?

I have some past experience in people accidentally/carelessly overwriting 
changes that have been in CVS only.  Actually doing the builds was intended as 
an additional safeguard against that, as well as one for immediately catching 
problems I may have caused (there shouldn't be any, but I managed to create 
(and fix) one so far).  But I'll resort to just tagging changes in CVS and 
doing builds as local or scratch ones for the remaining packages, hopefully 
that's enough.

> > Packages that may have a better upstream tarball available:
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > (not necessarily all of these will be touched)
>
> ...
>
> > lzma
>
> ...
>
> I'd assume this would not be changed, for bootstrapping reasons.

Yep, I considered that, but ended up including it in the list of possibly-to-
be-touched packages for two reasons: there are already bootstrapping problems 
(coreutils, gzip, rpm etc etc and I'm not aware of documentation what are the 
expected issues/special cases that one should take care of when bootstrapping 
Fedora), and I think it's quite likely that rpm will start unpacking lzma 
tarballs with xz soon[0] so this wouldn't actually be a bootstrap problem much 
longer.  But I'll take a 2nd look when I get this far.

[0] http://rpm.org/ticket/85