Is %autosetup another unwanted baby of Fedora?
hguemar at fedoraproject.org
Tue Jul 14 16:19:47 UTC 2015
2015-07-14 10:24 GMT+02:00 Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk at redhat.com>:
> On 07/13/2015 02:39 PM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > When I moved to Fedora after years of doing Debian packages I noticed
> > that there is no such thing as patch management when it comes to Fedora
> > packages. Everyone is using %patch macro with files of random patchlevel
> > (some even use reverse patches).
> > %autosetup was created to handle that but probably less than 5% of
> > packages use it. Why?
> > Is it because no one told that it exists? Or maybe because
> > implementation has some issues which no one wants to fix? Or other (I
> > exclude laziness of package maintainers)?
> I also like how Debian patches their packages (stardardization: quilt,
> DEP-3, patch tracker web app, ...) and I was initially quite eager about
> %autosetup/%autopatch, but it turned out to be unusable for me.
> I maintain most of patches as commits in private branches of upstream
> git repos and generate them with "git format-patch
> <latest-release-tag>". %autosetup and %autopatch don't work with patches
> generated this way, while %patch does.
Works for me, you need to tell %autosetup that you're using git with the
option -S git
> Another (lesser) reason is increased difficulty of backporting spec
> files to work with older rpm-build, such as when creating software
> collections for older OS.
> I use %autopatch in one of my packages (eclipse-m2e-core) so that I
> don't forget how it works (or doesn't work :)
> Mikolaj Izdebski
> Software Engineer, Red Hat
> IRC: mizdebsk
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel