Nils Philippsen píše v Pá 19. 05. 2006 v 12:27 +0200: > On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 03:22 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 12:03 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > > > > Should I check the value of "%fedora" so it would look like > > > > > > %if "%fedora" < 5 > > > BuildRequires: xorg-x11-Xvfb > > > %else > > > BuildRequires: xorg-x11-server-Xvfb, xorg-x11-fonts-base > > > %endif > > > > > > or should I use "%dist" for the checks? I was probably already mentioned > > > on this list, but I not able to find it. > > > > Problem with both: > > > > [mpeters@atlantis ~]$ rpm -E %dist > > %dist > > [mpeters@atlantis ~]$ rpm -E %fedora > > %fedora > > [mpeters@atlantis ~]$ > > > > It would make the spec file unbuildable on a lot of systems. > > What you could do - something like > > > > %define mod_x %(eval "if [ -f /some/file ]; then echo 1; else echo 0; > > fi") > > > > where /some/file is the xorg-x11-server-Xvfb path to a file that is > > different from the <fc5 xorg-x11-Xvfb path to the file. > > Well, this depends on the package in question being installed. You could > instead use the %fedora macros and if they don't exist, use defaults. > Check out the current bzflag spec file to see what I mean. Thanks to all. I will use the "bzflag" method because it uses the standard %fedora tag but is also buildable on other distros controlled by a command line option. Dan -- TinyERP maintainer for Fedora Extras -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
