On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 13:12 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the person > > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good practice > > to explicitly list files without globs whereever it is practical todo so. I'd > > make an exception for files which don't have functional impact eg don't list > > 1000 HTML files individually, but it is always worth listing everything in > > /usr/bin, and /usr/lib(64) explicitly without globs. > > I used to agree with this, but I've come around to thinking that spec > files should be smaller, less complicated, and more automatable. I > think we'd be better having a post-build test warning that this package > has files missing from the previous build. That could be advisory, or > it could even gate, with the packager clearing the gate by updating the > file list in the test, rather than in the spec file. If you still have to keep a list, why is it better to keep it in tests ? Simo. -- Simo Sorce Sr. Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
