In regard to: Re: %clean in rpm-4.4.7+, Tim Mooney said (at 5:53pm on May...:
In regard to: Re: %clean in rpm-4.4.7+, Jeff Johnson said (at 6:14pm on
May...:
%__spec_clean_body test -d '%{buildsubdir}' && %{__rm} -rf
'%{buildsubdir}'\
%{nil}
accomplish all of what I'm after? Is it "safe" to use %{buildsubdir}
in %__spec_clean_body -- will it be filled in? Also, are these macros
only executed on a successful rpmbuild?
Should, but untested.
Note that %buildsubdir is not known until %setup executes (not parsed)
that's the flaw in buildsubdir, undefined for most of a spec file parse.
AFAIK, %buildsubdir is well defined, but possibly
with odd default value if no, or multiple, %setup was present.
Good point, didn't think of that.
I could just try it, but the possibility for havok after an errant rm -rf
has me hesitating.
So add an echo and look a bit.
:-) I was looking for an ironclad guarantee!
I'll do some minimal testing and report back if I encounter any gotchas.
I just discovered that %__spec_clean_body doesn't do what I want. It's
only rpmExpand'ed when
parsePart == PART_INSTALL
Not when
(parsePart == PART_CLEAN)
That code always expands this:
%{?buildroot:rm -rf '%{buildroot}'\n}
This is in build/parseBuildInstallClean.c
Tim
--
Tim Mooney mooney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Information Technology Services (701) 231-1076 (Voice)
Room 242-J6, IACC Building (701) 231-8541 (Fax)
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
