On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:31:57 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
> > > > Basically, currently it _does not matter_ whether you use %buildroot or
> > > > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT because neither one is deprecated. Just don't use both at
> > > > once.
> > >
> > > Be careful Michael, you're now questioning official fedora.us policy.
> >
> > Shrug, he's not alone in that. I was against *mandating* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> > instead of %{buildroot} all the way and still am (simply because
> > %{buildroot} is faster to type and also mixes better with all the
> > %{_libdir} macros and such visually), and there were/are others as well.
>
> I know you were and I've seen more people against that policy than in
> favor of it on the mailinglist.
Is it a policy? A policy as in "blocker criterion"? ;) Great. I tell you
what: I don't care. Because it would mean that a src.rpm taken from Red
Hat Enterprise Linux and modified slightly would be insufficient. That
cannot be true, in particular not with regard to the "patches" repository.
> > OTOH that's what a community project is about: you get to express your
> > opinion and vote, doesn't mean your vote is the one that counts.
> > Compromises, in other words.
>
> Well, I'd like to see the votes again ;)
>
> As my impression was that decisions were made on IRC and/or mainly based
> on expressions by a famous Red Hat developer I dare not mention ;)
As pointed out by me quite some time ago, I find some of the groundwork
over-ambitious. But I haven't seen anyone blocking the release of a
working package because it used %buildroot. Most packages have lots
of other issues, real issues.
> We've got some others like the infamous 'Epoch must be included even if
> zero' decision,
Which has had a good reason.
> or the 'Source-tag may not have macros' decision,
Macros in URLs simply don't work. If you want macros in Source tags,
cut off everything up to the file name like
Source0: %name-%version.tar.gz
and put an example download URL as a comment, e.g.
# ftp://ftp.foo.bar/foo/foo-1.0.tar.gz
Source0: %name-%version.tar.gz
Certainly much better than weird constructs like
Source0: http://www.foo.bar/%name/%version/%name-%{version}rc1.tar.gz
(note the ugly "rc1" hack)
> or the
> 'We dont like to mix repositories' decision and countless others.
That's more of a "we cannot -- unless there would be very tight
cooperation".
--
