On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 08:42:09 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thursday 08 February 2007 08:30, Joe Orton wrote:
> > Use of $RPM_SOURCE_DIR is not covered in the packaging guidelines nor in
> > the review guidelines. It's flagged by rpmlint, which, as the
> > guidelines *do* say, is often wrong.
>
> And it has been pointed out to you many times _why_ the use of $RPM_SOURCE_DIR
> is bad.
Why is it? You put a lot of emphasis into your sentence. Instead, rehash
why it is bad, please. There are pros and cons. Why do you fight
$RPM_SOURCE_DIR?
Why rpmlint looks out for $RPM_SOURCE_DIR becomes clear when you
display its explanation. Look:
$ rpmlint -I use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR
use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR :
You use $RPM_SOURCE_DIR or %{_sourcedir} in your spec file. If you have to
use a directory for building, use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead.
Another pitfall inexperienced packagers can run into with $RPM_SOURCE_DIR
has been explained in an older message by me in this thread. Nevertheless,
using $RPM_SOURCE_DIR can be beneficial in some cases.
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
