On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 11:41 -0400, David Cantrell wrote: > On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 08:16:55 +0900 > John Summerfield <debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > > On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 08:20 +0900, John Summerfield wrote: > > >> Jeremy Katz wrote: > > >>> * Don't carry the RPM spec file in the repository; have it just in the > > >>> packaging repo instead. > > >> Why? > > > > > > Bit duplication and having to sync changes across between where the > > > packages are built (which requires the spec file) and the upstream repo > > > is a bit annoying at times > > > > > > Jeremy > > > > If I were to pull it from git, I'd be fairly put out to find I didn't > > have the build instructions as embodied in the spec file. I see the spec > > file as the primary "scripts used to control compilation and > > installation of the executable." > > It only runs 'make' and 'make install', so the Makefile(s) are actually the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. > > What is useful from the spec file is the BuildRequires, but we could fix that by having a ./configure script that checks the environment we are about to build on. Keeping autoconf updated is easier/better than a spec file? I don't think so. -sv _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
