On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:24:46AM -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:00 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 16:12 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:47 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > > > > > > > There are variables like build host, build time, file timestamps, file > > > > modes, --define's passed to the srpm build, possibly other buildsys > > > > configuration variations etc. All of which are sort of cosmetic, but > > > > nevertheless result in a different source rpm. > > > > > > I'm really not worried about cosmetic changes. None of these things > > > should affect the binary packages generated from that src.rpm. > > > > --defines end up in various dependencies of the source rpm, which does > > not matter as long as one doesn't use its dependencies for anything, but > > the specfile's instead. (This is not limited to these packages.) > > > > The original question remains though; what to do with the srpms? > > Discard or overwrite the ones already in the repo? My +1 to the former, > > or more generally: never overwrite any package in the repository. > > Personally, since the buildsystem is going to have to treat > kernel-module-* packages differently, I'd like to see it build them like > this: > > When a make build is done in kernel-module-foo/FC-3/, the buildsystem > assembles the sources and makes a SRPM. It then looks at a list (either > generated at buildtime, or preexistant) of the released kernels for > FC-3, and iterates through each of them, running rpmbuild --rebuild > --define "kver $VERSION". At the end of the loop, we should have all the > binary packages and a single SRPM. > > ~spot > -- > Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 > Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) > Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org > Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! > > -- > Fedora-packaging mailing list > Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging +1 -- Jack Neely <slack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Realm Linux Administration and Development PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
