On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 11:14 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:56:39AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 10:33 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:25:36AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 09:33 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 06:06:11AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > > E.g. there exist packages, which want/need to be built
"multi-staged",
> > > > > with %build containing (often: temporary) installs to
%{buildroot}.
> > > > > In some (very rare) occasions, packages even require
"building" inside
> > > > > of %buildroot.
> > > >
> > > > These are exactly the broken packages that I want to cater with the
> > > > proposed changes!
> > > There ain't anything broken with these packages ;)
>
> Then I can't avoid replying a bit clearer:
>
> * The issue you are trying to address is not related at all to our
> original problem ("free of side-effects")
So? Is that the only problem we are interested in solving in this
group? What kind of childish argument is that? Let's become
constructive again.
Pardon, in which world are you living? Being opposed to a
proposal is
considered to be destructive?
I am saying your extension to the proposal doesn't solve any problem, it
introduces NEW problems, that's why I am opposed to it.
> * Your proposal does not solve an actual technical problem, to
the
> contrary, it artificially introduces new ones.
As said, you're entitled to your opinion. As well as others like
myself are entitled to the opinion that packages writing into
%{buildroot} at any other stage that %install are broken.
If you continue to stiffly argue on technical grounds we'll end up
doing all in %prep. There is no technical reason not to do everything
there, right? No side-effects, the binary results are the same and so
on. You'll probably start removing comments next, since they is no
technically needed.
Right!
The %prep/%build/%install separation is an artificial separation based
on the assumption that all packages have a build model supporting this
3-staged building model.
Reality is: Most GNU packages do, but this doesn't apply in general.
Not all packages have a "natural separation" fitting into this model.
There are packages for which %prep/%build/%install can be collapsed into
one step (e.g. by simply untarring into %RPM_BUILD_ROOT[1], instead of
copying them around through the different stage), there are others for
which %build consists of several stages with installation of subpackages
into temporary locations.
Ralf
[1] Very handy and effective for packages consisting of several 10MBs.