(also re-sending this to the list because the original post was
auto-rejected. Zbigniew's address is now in the whitelist, so it
shouldn't happen again)
On 01/08/2015 03:49 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 03:42:03PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 01/08/2015 03:01 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 02:22:18PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
>>> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek pushed the patch below to the netcf.spec in
>>> the Fedora package, and I had a couple questions about the changes so I
>>> figured I would post them here before making a similar patch for
>>> upstream. (Note that the "packaging guidelines" referenced are for
>>> Fedora, here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines . They
>>> obviously don't apply to all ports of netcf, but I think only the Red
>>> Hat, CentOS, and Fedora ports of netcf use rpm anyway).
>>>
>>> On 01/08/2015 11:26 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>>>> commit d9f2694d2a67869728cfe1e3d874715f2fdcbc48
>>>> Author: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl>
>>>> Date: Thu Jan 8 11:19:39 2015 -0500
>>>>
>>>> Update to packaging guidelines
>>>>
>>>> netcf.spec | 18 +++++-------------
>>>> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>> ---
>>>> diff --git a/netcf.spec b/netcf.spec
>>>>
>>>> @@ -112,13 +111,9 @@ sed -i /StandardOutput=journal+console/d
src/netcf-transaction.service.in
>>>> make %{?_smp_mflags}
>>>>
>>>> %install
>>>> -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>>>> make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT SYSTEMD_UNIT_DIR=%{_unitdir} \
>>>> INSTALL="%{__install} -p"
>>>> -find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -exec rm -f {} ';'
>>>> -
>>>> -%clean
>>>> -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>>>> +find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -delete
>>> Zbigniew - I can't find the place in the Fedora packaging guidelines
>>> that recommends against doing this (and I'm by no means a specfile
>>> expert, even this one was originally written by someone else). Can you
>>> point me to the justification for removing the rm -rf's
>> It's not expressly forbidden to have a %clean section, but it's
certainly
>> discouraged in new packages (e.g. fedora-review will complain). Cleanup is
>> done automatically by rpm in F13+ and EPEL6+ [1], so %clean can be removed to
>> save a few lines and simplify the spec file.
>>
>> [1]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Cleaning_BuildRoot_in_.25clean
>>
>>> (and replacement in %clean with the find that only rm's *.la)?
>> Note that the rm's are still in %install (-delete is equivalent to the
>> -exec rm invocation).
> Ah, right - I missed the fact that the %clean line was also deleted. But
> this leaves open the question of why you have %install only deleting
> *.la in buildroot. The EPEL doc you reference implies that %install also
> automatically cleans up buildroot for RHEL6+ (but doesn't exactly say
> it). If this is the case, why do we need to remove *.la?
.la files are removed because libtool insists on installing them but they
are completely useless. This is unrelated to cleaning the buildroot.
Zbyszek