On 8/1/06, Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 01/08/06, Axel Liljencrantz <liljencrantz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for the tip, that makes a lot of sense. I provide you with a
> revised, unified monster. It is hardcoded to handle all known fedora
> versions correctly, and in case of a non-fedora system, it falls back
> to checking the layout of the filesystem and performing an educated
> guess as to the correct dependencies.
>
It is my understanding that including cruft in the spec file to allow
it to build on non fedora distributions is strongly discouraged in
extras - the spec files in fedora extras are for fedora. So I would
suggest removing the %if 0%{?fedora} parts.
That said, I don't see any directives in the packaging guidelines
about this - perhaps we need clarification on this matter.
As I said in one of my earlier mails, for me there is a benefit in
maintaining only one spec file instead of many. I will of course
respect fedora guidelines, but if it would be acceptable to have this
rather small amount of non-fedora cruft in the spec it would make life
a bit easier for me.
There is also a small potential for confusion if the spec file that
ships in the fish tarball is different from the one Fedora uses, not a
big deal, but a small source of possible bugs and confusion.
Jonathan
--
Axel
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
