On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:24:46AM -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:00 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 16:12 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:47 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
There are variables like build host, build time, file timestamps, file modes, --define's passed to the srpm build, possibly other buildsys configuration variations etc. All of which are sort of cosmetic, but nevertheless result in a different source rpm.
I'm really not worried about cosmetic changes. None of these things should affect the binary packages generated from that src.rpm.
--defines end up in various dependencies of the source rpm, which does not matter as long as one doesn't use its dependencies for anything, but the specfile's instead. (This is not limited to these packages.)
The original question remains though; what to do with the srpms? Discard or overwrite the ones already in the repo? My +1 to the former, or more generally: never overwrite any package in the repository.
Personally, since the buildsystem is going to have to treat kernel-module-* packages differently, I'd like to see it build them like this:
When a make build is done in kernel-module-foo/FC-3/, the buildsystem assembles the sources and makes a SRPM. It then looks at a list (either generated at buildtime, or preexistant) of the released kernels for FC-3, and iterates through each of them, running rpmbuild --rebuild --define "kver $VERSION". At the end of the loop, we should have all the binary packages and a single SRPM.
~spot
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
+1