On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 11:43 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
To some extent, yes. macros can go overboard, though. I think that the
macros you're planning are going to make sense, though :-)
Thanks.
The way to get these changed is to first go through the Packaging
Committee to get the changes approved, then have the macros merged into
the packages that will provide them. Then patch the packages that
should be updated.
Would it be best to have the concrete implementation (or at least some
examples) built before taking it to the packaging committee, or no?
Note: I remember one argument against macros being that they make spec
files harder to port between distros but I'm not willing to champion
that argument. If someone else does, I'll certainly listen to the
reasoning, though. :-)
The obvious answer to that is to try and standardize macro usage between
distributions, not to not use macros. For e.g., I revamped the Mandriva
Tcl packaging policy late last year: I took the macro names and even
code snippets from Fedora's Tcl policy. I just implemented them as
system-wide macros in the tcl-devel package instead of writing in the
policy that they should be re-defined at the top of every spec file :)
Yah. let's get the rpm macros standardized at the lsb.....
-sv
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
