On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 13:37 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 21:23 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote: > > Oh, no... > > > > > > I've spent a little bit of time on the shuttle to/from work hacking on > > > Makefile.common. The general idea is to remove the Release: and % > > > changelog fields from spec files, > > > > And then I have to maintain two versions of the spec file -- one for > > Fedora build system, other for: another distros, another Fedora-related > > distros, local builds etc... > > In my experience, everyone has slightly forked versions of spec files > because they mandate different macros, etc. > > I do in fact want to enable cross-distribution sharing of build scripts, > but I see that as a separate, longer term project from improving > Fedora's build process. > > I actually started translating some spec files into a new build system > to solve other problems that Fedora has like rampant copy+paste of > scriptlets, etc. You can see some examples of my thoughts here: > > A simple one: > http://cdn.verbum.org/hotwire.py > A lot more complex: > http://cdn.verbum.org/hal.py > > The idea is that you'd compile that into a spec file - we're not talking > about changing the binary formats in any way. But, that's for the > future. While starting on that I realized that it made more sense to > take an incremental approach of solving some of the more problematic > spec issues. Very cool - the DRY principle in action. Seems somewhat reminiscent of conary recipes. Do you having working code yet to generate the specfile, or is this just an idea of syntax? [snip] -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
