On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 16:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Paul Howarth (paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > Why isn't this the default for RPM, either patched into the default > > > RPM package, or in redhat-rpm-config? > > > > If you take an SRPM with no BuildRoot: and try to build to build it as a > > regular user on just about any system it'll fail because nobody AFAIK > > currently ships an rpm package with a default buildroot. So even if it's > > fixed in rpm or mock, it'll be a while before it's safe to remove > > BuildRoot: tags if the packager wants any semblance of portability. > > I see no reason why the default can't be pulled from the stock > system RPM macros; in fact, that's the logical place for it, > rather than per-package. Of course it is, but that doesn't help all the legacy/other distros that don't set the default in this way. If someone wants to rebuild a buildroot-less SRPM on such a system, they'll need to edit the spec file or their rpmmacros file, which in the case of end users trying to get a package working on their system is a whole extra layer of hassle. I'm all for setting a default buildroot in rpm but think that there should be a substantial grace period before the BuildRoot: tags are removed from packages en masse. Paul. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
