example of buildsys rpm

[seth vidal]

On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 10:09 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> seth vidal wrote:
> >> 1. okay - as panu was so kind to point out - we don't need 3 packages,
> >> really. - just one
> >> 2. I made the changes in mock cvs to have it install via a package of
> >> the above style - the config option is chroot_dep_package
> >> 3. what other patches need to go into mock before we release 0.5?
> >>   - the one's I know about but wouldn't mind a reference to are:
> >>     a. /dev/std* patch
> >
> >         1. the patch submitted to fix this is definitely in mock cvs
> >         2. it is not entirely clear if this patch fixes the problem.
> >
> Well, it fixed it for me, but I wasn't the one that reported the problem.
> 
> > 1. Clark: could you modify your buildsys rpm so that it produces a
> > single package named buildsys-build and could you check that spec file
> > into mock cvs, since it will be handy there?
> Sure.
> 
> In my original specfile I was playing kinda fast-n-loose, so I'd like
> to insure that the values we use for Version and Release make some
> sense. Should the Version field match our proposed mock version (i.e.
> 0.5)? Do we want to include the FC release in the release field (e.g.
> fc5-1) or something like that? Or should Release just be a number
> relative to the version string?
> 

since the packages it depends on will change based on the distro and
release the chroot is for we should probably just make a version of it
and have the per-distro changes be marked with a dist tag like packages
in extras frequently are.

Then for other distros we can do the same:

fc3
fc4
fc5
fc6
el3
el4
el5
suse25
mdv64

etc etc

does that make sense to you?>
-sv