Re: macrofied kernel.spec

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 01:52:44PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
>  > Only other thing I'm seeing right now, though its probably
> been this way
>  > forever, is that we're a bit inconsistent about whether we use %{name}
>  > or just 'kernel' in %package and %description.
>  
>  That matters when doing the variant-source packages like kernel-vanilla,
>  which I haven't tested lately.  For the "install the kernel-foo package"
>  parts of %description, %{name}-foo might be better since it will make the
>  literal instructions match the intended reality for that case.
>  
>  For the provides/requires some are intended to be %{name} and some kernel.
>  i.e., %{name}-debuginfo-common-%{_target_cpu}, but kernel-drm. 
On the kernel-xen package, it gets more complicated: because the source
package name is 'kernel-xen-2.6', I need to replace most of %{name}
occurrences with 'kernel' (I defined a macro for that, %{pkgbasename})
and use "-n %{pkgbasename}-variant" on %package, %description, %files,
and other sections.

I don't know if the %{pkgbasename} change would be desirable for the
main kernel package, but with the new macros, making the changes to use
it instead of %{name} on kernel-xen will be easier.

-- 
Eduardo