-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Monday 22 December 2008, Anders F Björklund <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Certainly did not intend any blame, just that you might mention
> the context of your specfile (i.e. your "distro" and/or macros) ?
My fault, sorry. And the quotation marks are not needed: Even though it's
just a company-internal distribution it is complete and not based on
anything except my own knowledge. I had to state this just like a proud
father, you know. ;-)
> Otherwise one would expect it to work on a basic rpm5.org install,
> such as the one (devtool macosx) where I tried it and failed... :-)
Well, I'm not quite clear how this is handled on the list. Jeff on some
pourposes wrote that this or that is a vendor-specific decision, leaving me
with the impression that to create a "proper" or "complete" build system a
distributor has to get his hands dirty and create a set of macros for his
> But if you have ideas, do bring them up here or on the rpm-devel list -
> maybe they would be useful for everyone and could be included upstream ?
What about provided a nicely formatted example spec file or spec file
template that could be packed with RPM as additional documentation?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Mon Dec 22 18:31:20 2008