On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 13:21, Petr Šabata <contyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Based on the recent discussions around %fedora/%rhel macros and ELN, > and %bcond generally being confusing to work with, I came up with a > distribution-wide feature that defines generic feature keywords and > associated helper macros that packages can check in build-time > conditionals. > > The key advantage here is the defaults are defined by the buildroot, > not the package. The package is just a building block. > > I'd like some input to improve this and unless this turns out to be a > really bad idea, I intend to submit it as a change proposal. Even > though the more packages use it the more beneficial it gets, it's, of > course, perfectly optional. > > Details in the gist: > https://gist.github.com/contyk/0aaaaf0585c57976ca18a293b3566408 Ad. Dan Mach's presented spec file: > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/blob/dnf-5-devel/libdnf.spec I really like how all the switches are defined almost on top of the spec file so I think lots of inspiration can be drawn from that. Now I also think that introduction of the new %use scheme for build options instead of the current with/without scheme might be an overkill. I think lines like these: %bcond_with html %bcond_without man could be replaced by: %with_option_env html 0 %with_option_env man 1 i.e. %with_option_env <option_name> <default_value> %with_option_env could be looking at an environmental buildroot setting with the possibility to be overridden on command-line by --with and --without as usual. There could be also: %with_option <option_name> <default_value> which wouldn't look at environment settings so it would be the same thing as %bcond_with/%bcond_without but less confusing. So with this, you wouldn't need to change conditions like: %if %{with foo} ... %endif and %if %{without foo} ... %endif ...so fewer changes and less work. I also think these conditions are quite fine (except relying on with_foo being either defined or undefined, which is quite funky but I don't think it is a reason to replace them). --- The yml files and translation from them into the actual macro files are nice but I would consider if the hw dependent default values can be added in future as a feature. The local_<pkg>.yml file seems somewhat out of place to me. I think it could be rather kept as an idea for future and for now we could just start with only buildroot configs? Best regards! clime > > Cheers, > P > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
