On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 02:20:36PM -0400, David Cary Hart wrote: > > This has been rehashed a zillion times, but the short answer is that it's > > not really any good, since the resulting source tree isn't necessarily > > "clean" for the build architecture you expect. Tweaking the source rpm is a > > bit more learning and a tiny bit more work upfront, but it makes management > > easier (worth sometime) and produces more correct results (priceless). > Nah. The end result is the same. The difference is that making the Yeah? Which architecture conditionals do you end up with in your source tree? > src.rpm in FC4 creates a source tree that can be moved to /usr/src. > Making the src.rpm in FC3 (with only source rpm selected in the spec) > creates a source.rpm "rpmbuild -bp" if you really need that for some reason. > The issue is portability which is a tarball in FC4 vs an rpm in FC3. I > just think that creating an rpm is more consistent with the Fedora > approach. Yes, and it's not the approach just to inconvenience people. -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> Current office temperature: 80 degrees Fahrenheit. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
