Jarod Wilson wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:06:58PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> > Dave Jones wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 01:41:45PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>> > > > I was thinking about adding something like this to the .spec file
>> > > > at the beginning:
>> > > >
>> > > > %define allowup 1
>> > > > %define allowsmp 1
>> > > > %define allowpae 1
>> > > > %define allowxen 1
>> > > > %define allowdoc 1
>> > > > %define allowdump 1
>> > > > %define allowheaders 1
>> > > > %define allowdebug 1
>> > > >
>> > > > Then, after all the automatic enable/disable of various options is done,
>> > > > turn off everything that's not allowed.
>> > > >
>> > > > This would make it much easier to change what gets built.
>> > >
>> > > The amount of %define's we've grown recently does seem to be
>> > > getting out of hand. I'm not sure it's a good/bad thing, but it
>> > > does make the spec a little harder to read.
>> > >
>> > > Not sure about your proposal tbh. I'll think about it more
>> > > when I'm back from vacation :)
>> >
>> > I like it, at least in theory. Invariably, I'll do a test build, and to
>> > speed the process, I twiddle bits at the top of the spec to disable
>> > certain builds. In the i686 case, I almost always forget to hunt down
>> > lower to turn off pae.
>>
>>
>> But I've not objection to making it easier for people who don't follow
>> my workflow and do things differently.
>
> Rather than wasting Chuck's time implementing this, what say a
> lower-level grunt like myself try to implement something along these
> lines? :) I've got a few ideas on how to do it using either %bcond or
> %with{,out}...
>
You understand rpm better than I do, so go for it. I'd use Dave's method
but an RPM is so much more convenient...
_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
