On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 23:09:34 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote: > > The fedora.us documents don't say anywhere that $RPM_BUILD_ROOT would be > > "better than" or "more correct than" %buildroot. They just say that > > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is preferred at fedora.us and give the reason why that is > > the case. > > http://www.fedora.us/wiki/QAChecklist > > "Does the package have any %{buildroot} macros? If so, they should be > replaced with $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Ditto for %{optflags} -> > $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. For more info, see > http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/2003-April/001155.html."; Again, $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is preferred at fedora.us as long as it is described as the "official supported" mechanism on getting access to buildroot. > The same for fedora.us legacy QAChecklist. Does such a thing exist? Isn't in work-in-progress still? > I guess more people want that document corrected, "Me too" comments as private replies to me would be appreciated. It would be important that people, who want to contribute, or potential contributors voice their opinion. > still I can't undo > myself of the feeling you're against it because I brought it up. Are you kidding? That's a completely unfounded suspicion. --
