Re: [PATCH] add git.spec and adapt Makefile for RPM build

Chris Wright [off-list ref] said:

* Horst von Brand (vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl) wrote:

quoted

Kay Sievers [off-list ref] said:

quoted

On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:23:03PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:

quoted

quoted

This version creates the git.spec from a git.spec.in with the version
number from the Makefile.

quoted

Please don't. The spec file /controls/ the building of the package, it
can't be generated as part of the build process.

It certainly can.

Yep. Maybe "can't" was a bit too strong. "Should never be" is right.

                  It simply means a structured release process.  IOW,
the git.spec would be generated for a release tarball.

Come on, you have to fix the spec file for the changelog and version by
hand anyway, autoconfiscating it doesn't help one iota there.

And yes, I've seen quite a few packages autogenerating the spec file. As a
result, you /can't/ build the package from pristine sources, you have to
unpack and configure to get enough for building. For me that just isn't
acceptable, as it completely misses the point of RPM.

(You can go "rpmbuild -ta whatever-2.3.1.tar.bz2" if the tarball is set up
correctly, your idea prevents that).
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513

On Mon, 2 May 2005, Horst von Brand wrote:

And yes, I've seen quite a few packages autogenerating the spec 
file. As a result, you /can't/ build the package from pristine 
sources, you have to unpack and configure to get enough for 
building. For me that just isn't acceptable, as it completely 
misses the point of RPM.

I think maybe you're missing the point of what is sometimes known as 
a 'make dist' target. (eg in autoconf type build systems).

(You can go "rpmbuild -ta whatever-2.3.1.tar.bz2" if the tarball is set up
correctly, your idea prevents that).

Then the tarball wasn't of distributable (ie end-user buildable) 
source.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
"Now this is a totally brain damaged algorithm.  Gag me with a smurfette."
 		-- P. Buhr, Computer Science 354

* Horst von Brand (vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl) wrote:

Chris Wright [off-list ref] said:

quoted

                  It simply means a structured release process.  IOW,
the git.spec would be generated for a release tarball.

Come on, you have to fix the spec file for the changelog and version by
hand anyway, autoconfiscating it doesn't help one iota there.

That's the point, you don't _have_ to do that.

And yes, I've seen quite a few packages autogenerating the spec file. As a
result, you /can't/ build the package from pristine sources, you have to
unpack and configure to get enough for building. For me that just isn't
acceptable, as it completely misses the point of RPM.

(You can go "rpmbuild -ta whatever-2.3.1.tar.bz2" if the tarball is set up
correctly, your idea prevents that).

You just place the generated spec file in a release tarball.  IOW, your
'release' Makefile target depends on foo.spec, and creates a clean release
tarball with all you need to do an -ta build.

thanks,
-chris

On Mon, 2 May 2005, Paul Jakma wrote:

I think maybe you're missing the point of what is sometimes known as a 'make 
dist' target. (eg in autoconf type build systems).

Apologies: /Or/ the project which provided such a tarball missed the 
point.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
"MacDonald has the gift on compressing the largest amount of words into
the smallest amount of thoughts."
 		-- Winston Churchill