question about RedHat/Fedora and the GPL

[Jeff Pitman]

It's not "factored" in or required.  Can you read shell code?

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 03:44, condition terminal wrote:
> Funny....
>
> If beehive has little to nothing to do with the build, why does it
> have to be factored into spec files?
>
> Hardly a glorified cron job or meta-foo
>
> By the fact that spec files have to accommadate beehive it clearly
> shows that beehive is indeed a big factor in the RH/Fedora binaires.
>
> ta.
>
> On 6/7/05, Curtis Doty <Curtis at greenkey.net> wrote:
> > Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > >yes. All the scripts needed to control the compilation and
> > > installation of the executable is in the src.rpm perfectly fine.
> >
> > I find myself always adding something like:
> >
> > --- kernel-2.6.spec     2005-05-17 16:50:40.000000000 -0700
> > +++ kernel-2.6gk.spec   2005-05-30 18:58:15.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
> >  %define sublevel 11
> >  %define kversion 2.6.%{sublevel}
> >  %define rpmversion 2.6.%{sublevel}
> > -%define rhbsys  %([ -r /etc/beehive-root -o -n
> > "%{?__beehive_build}" ] && echo || echo .`whoami`)
> > +%define rhbsys  %([ -r /etc/beehive-root -o -n
> > "%{?__beehive_build}" ] && echo || echo .`whoami`@`hostname -s`)
> >  %if %{FC3}
> >  %define release %(R="$Revision: 1.27 $"; RR="${R##: }"; echo
> > ${RR%%?})_FC3%{rhbsys}
> >  %endif
> >
> > It sure would be nice if the Red Had specfile maintainers took us
> > into consideration. .. Those of us who don't have access to the Red
> > Hat IP known as beehive. .. And have no problem managing our own
> > parallel build environments.
> >
> > ../C
> >
> > --
> > fedora-devel-list mailing list
> > fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

-- 
-jeff