Le lundi 24 juillet 2006 à 18:26 -0700, Christopher Stone a écrit : > Personally, I don't see the advantage to adding a bunch of extra stuff > to the spec files just to support FC4. +1 > Also Ville insists on their being a %build section for an unknown > reason. He claims people don't know what rpm does and not having a > %build will cause mysterious errors, when infact the rpm source code > clealy indicates the consequences of not using %build. These > consequences to no affect php-pear modules, so I do not understand his > reasoning for wanting to add a %build section to the template. Ville is right there is you omit build you'll get many side-effects you didn't bargain for. Also do you never change files with sed before you install them? This belongs in %build, not %setup or %install (the PHP SM spec for example had a very nasty bug at a time because the packager didn't respect this discipline and mixed install and file munging in the last section) -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
