Jeff Johnson wrote: > Kenneth Porter wrote: > > >All the packages I've built to date use a tarball as the base > >source. That is considered the best practice. > >A lot of open source projects are going to Subversion for > >version control Your question would apply equally to CVS or Git or any of the other version control systems too though. It is not svn specific. > >and I'm wondering if anyone's created a spec file > >that can serve as an example for using a repository tag instead of > >a tarball as a source? Note that when you do this source rpm files become relatively worthless. Normally the package can be rebuilt entirely from the .src.rpm file. But if the source must be checked out from an online vcs then the .src.rpm file no longer contains the source. Also the rebuild requires a live network connection to the version control server. Also if the version control server ever disappears for whatever reason then you can't rebuild the rpm files. If none of those things are important to you then there is no problem with building from version control source. > >Would one need to do much more than replace a "tar xfz" with a "svn > >co" in the %prep? Anything else I should worry about? > > Yep. > > About all you have to worry about is whether you want a persistent > checkout, in which case you need to test whether check-out exists > (or not), and update instead of initial checkout. In subversion the 'svn checkout' and 'svn update' operations are the same after the initial invokation. The only difference is that one gets the URL from the command line and the other gets the URL from the working copy. You can avoid worrying about one or the other and *always* do a checkout operation. That will work fine if the is an existing working copy already. Always doing an 'svn checkout' avoids the problem nicely. Bob _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
