On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 21:23 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
Oh, no...
>
> I've spent a little bit of time on the shuttle to/from work hacking on
> Makefile.common. The general idea is to remove the Release: and %
> changelog fields from spec files,
And then I have to maintain two versions of the spec file -- one for
Fedora build system, other for: another distros, another Fedora-related
distros, local builds etc...
In my experience, everyone has slightly forked versions of spec files
because they mandate different macros, etc.
I do in fact want to enable cross-distribution sharing of build scripts,
but I see that as a separate, longer term project from improving
Fedora's build process.
I actually started translating some spec files into a new build system
to solve other problems that Fedora has like rampant copy+paste of
scriptlets, etc. You can see some examples of my thoughts here:
A simple one:
http://cdn.verbum.org/hotwire.py
A lot more complex:
http://cdn.verbum.org/hal.py
The idea is that you'd compile that into a spec file - we're not talking
about changing the binary formats in any way. But, that's for the
future. While starting on that I realized that it made more sense to
take an incremental approach of solving some of the more problematic
spec issues.
Interesting... Perhaps you will propose the automated
"Version:"
determined by the tarball? Or even tarball's URL?
Actually, yes - that was one of the next steps =)
Actually, I never fill the cvs changelog. Only the spec's
changelog.
I don't blame you, because having two is very confusing.
For this, I will prefer to hack with "rpmbuild" at a
separate place and
to control what is happening immediately.
Well, we can make 'make local' do whatever it is you want - what is
different?