On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 11:48:52PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 23:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : > > adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent "complex" font package > > but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order > > in all font packages. The general pattern is the same but packagers have > > different tools and habits so slight variations exist. > > Anyway here is one occurence of what I worried about in all its glory > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=130814 > Yep. So, while less than ideal from your standpoint of putting the definition of the subpackage together with the call to the macro, does rearranging things like this do the trick? [Package info] [subpackage info] %prep [prep stuff] %build [build stuff] %install [install stuff] %_font_pkg -n 2 -f %{fontconf}-2.conf AccanthisADFStdNo2-*.otf Since %_font_pkg is creating %files sections and %pre and %post sections, that seems like both a valid workaround and where you'd look for those declarations in a non-font package. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpxtf3d21Qml.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
