Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 12:40 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Warren Togami wrote:
>>> Warren Togami wrote:
>>>> BuildRequires: auto-grab-source
>>>>
>>>> %prep
>>>> %setup -q
>>>> GRAB_SOURCENAME=glibc-2.5-fedora-20061008T1257.tar.bz2
>>>> GRAB_HASH=6aa114e3cde495c267ff8a6e55b90bec
>>>> GRAB_NAME=glibc
>>>> auto-grab-source $GRAB_NAME $GRAB_SOURCENAME $GRAB_HASH
>>> It could be even simpler than this.
>>>
>>> BuildRequires: auto-grab-source
>>> Source#: sources
>>>
>>> %prep
>>> auto-grab-source glibc
>>> auto-grab-source gcc
>>> auto-grab-source binutils
>>> # auto-grab-source reads the sources file for filenames and hashes
>>> # needs %%{name} parameter because that isn't specified in sources
>>> %setup -q
>>>
>> I kinda like this, except that I think auto-grab-source might just as
>> well be an rpm macro, currently its too small IMHO to be in its own package.
>>
>> That still leaves the question is this too evil for the many MB's it
>> will safe?
> Given the "look-aside cache" is clever, this doesn't safe many bytes on
> the build server.
>
> For the GNU toolchain's it's arguable, if this approach is applicable at
> all due to the restrictions of the GPL. It mandates you to make the
> sources corresponding the binaries you are shipping to be available.
>
And we are, in the srpms of the native binutils / gcc / whatever. The
idea is to only do this for cases where we can use the same version as
the native tools, otherwise we would just use a plain srpm, for the
reasons given by you about the GPL and other reasons too.
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
