On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 11:11 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le Mar 18 novembre 2008 09:32, Ralf Corsepius a écrit : > > > > On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 03:08 -0500, Jens Petersen wrote: > >> > As I wrote before, I don't think we could win a lot by automating. > >> > >> Well I tend to agree now: a good set of templates and rpm macros > >> seems the right way to go. > > No, rpm macros are the road to ruin a distro. > > > > Once they are used in a distro, they impose major portability issues > > and are close to impossible to get rid. > > Unfortunately, deploying fonts requires scriptlets to manage > thefontconfig cache, font packages are often huge and need splitting, > and sriplets + subpackages = boom without a minimal automation. > > Please review > http://nim.fedorapeople.org/rpm-fonts/rpm-fonts-1.8-1.fc11.src.rpm > and the other files in this directory, and propose ameliorations > before we make it the backbone of our Fedora 11 font packages. I will vote against this proposal and this package. Rationale: All these macros do is causing further pollution of the rpm macros, break many details (try rpmbuild --define '_datadir /opt/foo' and add further cross distro-portability issues (Consider RHEL3 or rpm's from other distros). May be you recall the issues with Mandrake / Mandriva macros and with SuSE-macros, now you seem to be wanting to conduct Fedora into the same direction. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
