Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338 --- Comment #9 from Ramon de C Valle <rcvalle@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #8) > > And even before I updated it, none of the resulting packages were empty. > > You still misunderstand it then. Or maybe you're contradicting yourself or not being clear enough. > > > > Just type "A". > > Interactive builds are not acceptable. Quoting myself from the previous comment: "...it doesn't happen for the "silently" updated Spec file anymore because I added the lines for removing the unpacked sources from previous builds, if any." > > > > Can you enumerate which "weird" things I do on prep? > > 1) not starting in a clean/empty builddir > 2) not building in a %{name}-%{version} namespace dir like thousands of > other packages > 3) unzipping the source manually instead of using %setup for that > 4) waiting for keyboard input because of 1) For 1 and 4 see my above answer, for 2 and 3, see below. > > > > Btw, are you planning helping with anything? > > Depends on whether you are willing to learn. At least you've started asking > questions. That's good. I would use this %prep section, which solves all the > problems in your one: > > %prep > %setup -q -c %{name}-%{version} > %setup -q -n %{name}-%{version}/distorm3/make/linux -D -T It seems redundant and also unnecessarily uses the %setup macro twice. Why is it better than: rm -fr %{_builddir}/distorm3 unzip %{SOURCE0} %setup -q -n distorm3/make/linux -D -T -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZQsuBc5rur&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review