example of buildsys rpm

[Clark Williams]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Chris Weyl wrote:

>On 4/4/06, Clark Williams <williams at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>It generates a small binary RPM (and an SRPM) that contains one file,
>>buildsys-minimal.spec and requires all the listed packages. I
>>originally had BuildRequires and then changed to Requires, just
>>because it's easy to query the resulting binary RPM for requires. I
>>suspect to be totally correct we would need to go back to BuildRequires.
>>
>>Anyway, that's what I thought Seth was talking about with his RPM
>>idea. What do you think?
>
>
>Looks right by me. Not sure it needs to include itself, but why not
>:) Requires is probably better than BuildRequires, as BuildRequires
>only means "packages needed to build this rpm" vs Requires' "packages
>needed to install this rpm", and I don't believe would would actually
>pull them in when installed.

Yeah, I see now that Requires is really what we want. Happy accident
on my part :)

The only reason I put the spec file into the payload of the RPM was to
be able to have something that indicates what the contents of the
chroot will be (besides having to run 'rpm -qp --requires' on the
binary package, that is). That and if you want to tweak it for some
special purpose, you can just take the spec file, edit it and recreate
the RPM.

The main reason I slapped this together was to get people to look at
it and see if there are gaping holes in the idea of using an RPM to
define the contents of various chroot configuration.

So far, no one has complained too loudly. It's early though...

Clark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEMvkUHyuj/+TTEp0RAsspAJ93o+Mlk5RW9HPg6b/Z4wB8tZJbngCfRuPN
uoufXGcsozHUTDmZkpQXhh8=
=DVmq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----