Packaging Guidelines: Why so lax for BuildRoot?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I'm curious why the packaging guidelines aren't more specific re: the
requirements for the BuildRoot tag.

To my mind, the BuildRoot is a purely internal "implementation detail"
of the build process, and no package should really depend on any
specific detail of the BuildRoot value/location.

So, I'm wondering:

1) Why doesn't Fedora specify a single BuildRoot value that all packages
"MUST" use (and possibly script an update of all existing .spec files).

2) Going further, why not remove BuildRoot from all .spec files, and
simply cause the "defined correct" value to be used without "manual"
intervention.

It seems one/both of the above would make reviewing easier; one less
thing to check (or only a single precise thing to check for, without
interpretation of what a "sane" BuildRoot is)

I feel I must be missing something given the flexibility allowed by the
guidelines. Any insight appreciated.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux