%bcond_with is backwards?

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 07:31:58PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:10:17PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> 
> > # conditionalize Ocaml support
> > %ifarch sparc64 s390 s390x
> > %bcond_with ocaml
> > %else
> > %bcond_without ocaml
> > %endif
> > 
> > #...
> > 
> > %if %{with ocaml}
> > BuildRequires:  ocaml
> > BuildRequires:  ocaml-findlib-devel
> > %endif
> > 
> > This code correctly disables OCaml support on architectures where we
> > don't bother to compile OCaml (sparc64 s390 s390x).  But the
> > conditional code looks backwards to me.  Does this make sense to
> > anyone?
> 
> It makes sense when you read "%bcond_with ocaml" as 'add a
> "--with-ocaml" build condition flag' to the spec.

It does?  Still seems backwards to me.  OCaml is disabled on the
listed architectures, so that'd be --without-ocaml wouldn't it?

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any
software inside the virtual machine.  Supports Linux and Windows.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/