On Tue, 16 Dec 2008, Mike McGrath wrote: > I've been talking with some of the SuSE guys and we agree there's some > overlap or at least coordination between their buildsystem and ours. The > first obvious low hanging fruit is common macros. For those who wonder > "why would we help OpenSuSE?" the answer is common goals, and better user > experiences. You sure about there being much overlap and thus a certain incentive to develop common macros? The last time I was paid to look at SuSE was around 2003 or so and back then there was not much common except the .spec suffix. BuildRequires weren't used at all (admittedly, Red Hat was rather frugal wrt BRs) and I haven't seen much use of %macros at all. AFAICS BuildRequirements were implemented by parsing #-commented lines and adding the named packages to the dependency list. Has this behaviour changed? On the other hand: Is the buildsystem the right place to work on common goals? I'd assume that specifically for macros, rpm.org is a better place. regards, andreas _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
