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

Re: Packaging guidelines: buildroot

On Wed, 17 May 2006, Bill Nottingham wrote:

Paul Howarth (paul city-fan org) said:
Of course it is, but that doesn't help all the legacy/other distros that
don't set the default in this way. If someone wants to rebuild a
buildroot-less SRPM on such a system, they'll need to edit the spec file
or their rpmmacros file, which in the case of end users trying to get a
package working on their system is a whole extra layer of hassle.

I'm all for setting a default buildroot in rpm but think that there
should be a substantial grace period before the BuildRoot: tags are
removed from packages en masse.

So it could be something that's done in development going forward only;
I don't see that as a big issue.

You could argue that %clean is superfluous spec file noise as well.

Ah yes, that - while we're at it lets get rid of that noise as well.

A related item, although not quite that straightforward, is 'rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT' at beginning of %install. There are some special cases where package build is broken in the sense that it installs stuff on the build-stage, OOo being a notable example. But those could be handled with a special --no-clean flag to %install or something.

	- Panu -

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