On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 22:34:33 +0100, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > For those of you who are interested I made available (S)RPM's for > libmcrypt, libmcrypt-devel and mcrypt for both Fedora Core 1 and Red Hat > Linux 9 at http://www.ottolander.nl/opensource/mcrypt/mcrypt.html . > > I feel it would be nice if these RPM's and libmhash would be included in > the core distribution, so PHP can be built with support for libmcrypt and > libmhash, as fe SUSE already does. > > Feel free to contact me about any improvements you think I should make to > the SPEC files. Your spec file is missing %defattr statements in the %files section. Due to that, currently all files in your binary rpms are owned by user leonard group leonard. I'm certain you don't want that. Where the packages are installed, an arbitary user with that uid/gid will own the installed files and be able to modify them. Instead of CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" ./configure --prefix=/usr \ --mandir=%{_mandir} --enable-static --libdir=%_libdir you could use: CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %configure --enable-static I'd recommend %setup -q to untar the source tarball quietly (this makes build logs smaller, too). My personal point of view with regard to RPM macros in "Patch:" fields is, it doesn't make much sense to use macros there. Usually there is no need to update a patch with the next upstream version of the software. And hence there is no need to make patch file names depend on the software version. Instead of e.g. libmcrypt-%{version}-notdynamic.diff, I would use a generic name or a hardcoded version. When a patch isn't updated, but its file name changes from one package version to the next package version, this only increases the content in rpm diffs. Rule of thumb: Only update packaged files and the spec file where necessary. If you want users and reviewers to be able to verify the included source tarballs easily, include a complete macro-free URL to the Source tarball, either directly in the "Source:" fields or as comments above. --
Attachment:
pgp00817.pgp
Description: PGP signature
