question about RedHat/Fedora and the GPL

[condition terminal]

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
>