On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 06:51:02 -0500 (EST), Mike A. Harris wrote: > On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > >> Macros work fine for me in Source tags, with URLs and without. > >> See the xchat spec file for an example. > >> > >> pts/34 mharris@porkchop:~/rpmbuild/rpms/xchat$ grep Source xchat.spec > >> Source: http://www.xchat.org/files/source/2.0/xchat-%{version}.tar.bz2 > > > >You haven't payed attention to the detail: > > > > $ wget http://www.xchat.org/files/source/2.0/xchat-%{version}.tar.bz2 > > ERROR 404: Not Found. > > Why on earth would you wget on the commandline with an rpm macro > embedded into the commandline? That is user-error. Do not cut > and paste the URL from the spec file to the commandline. Do not put macros into web URLs. > First of all, if you have the src.rpm installed, you _have_ the > source code already, and do not need to download it. I do have to compare the included tarball MD5 with upstream MD5. Alternatively, I need to visit the web page, find the download section and download manually from there. > If you want > to anyway for some reason, you have the URL where it is located > and can hand edit it to be useable if desired, or can cut and > paste the directory and go from there. Often doesn't work because directory indexing is not allowed. > I believe you can also query the spec file using --specfile to > get the Source and Patch lines, however I'd have to confirm that. Only to find out the URL is no longer valid because the packager has a working one in his own private bookmarks. > >And upon building source and binary rpm, the > >http://www.xchat.org/files/source/2.0/ is stripped off, and only > >the expanded xchat-%version.tar.bz2 is included in the RPM > >header. > > $ rpm -qp --qf '%{source}\n' /mnt/redhat/beehive/comps/dist/fc2/xchat/2.0.7-3/SRPMS/xchat-2.0.7-3.src.rpm > xchat-2.0.7.tar.bz2 Proves what I write above. :) > 2) To store the URL (if any given) in the Source field of the RPM > header, for people querying the src.rpm from the commandline > with rpm. See above, didn't work for you. > I'm not about to change the Source fields in any of my own spec > files to hard code the version and remove the existing macro > usage, which is correct, No one requires you do to that. You have misunderstood what all this is about. *sigh* > howver feel free to edit your own spec > files and change the version number in 10 places every time a new Why 10 places? Two places is enough. "Version:" and "Source:", everywhere else %{version} is fine. > version of the software you're maintaining comes out, and ensure > every location is updated, and track down the bugs/problems > caused if you forget in some location. If I forgot to updated the version in Source tag, the package would not even build. We've discussed this earlier. Sorry for cutting off much of your message, but I don't understand what you're aiming at. I don't want another heated thread based on misunderstandings. --
