On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 11:39:59 +0800, myk wrote:
> But, when running fedora-review, I get the error message:
>
> [!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
That is okay, because fedora-review cannot know where running parallel
Make would be a benefit actually. For example, when building only a single
Makefile target, there is nothing to parallelize via multiple jobs. On
the contrary, if it were dozens to hundreds of object files to make,
doing that in parallel before linking the final executable could be
beneficial.
fedora-review is trying to be helpful. It's not trying to tell you how
exactly you have to package something. It's not overriding the packaging
guidelines either. You're reading too much into its output.
> I tried to include %{?_smp_mflags} in the SELinux's Makefile make call,
>
> but this always resulted in an error during rpmbuild.
You've not quoted the error.
> Since the %{?_smp_mflags} is useful,
Not always.
> either 'make' needs to accept -j
> against the SELinux Makefile (and the SELinux Packaging page updated),
> or fedora-review needs to exclude SELinux Makefile lines when testing
> for the %{?_smp_mflags}.
>
> As I don't know what would involved in either approach, would like some
> guidance on whether filing a bug report against fedora-review is the
> most appropriate next step.
Just note that there are other scenarios where spec files run "make"
without %_smp_mflags. You've only found a single case where fedora-review
*could* try to recognise the familiar invocation and ignore it. However,
if it were changed in the future, fedora-review would need to be updated,
too, and would still complain about other cases of running Make without
%_smp_mflags.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
