[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Upstream SPEC files



On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:27:47 -0700, Stephen J. Smoogen wrote:

> Looking through the mimedefang source code I see it comes with its own
> spec file. While it does not look like the fedora extra ones.. I was
> wondering if I should use it or use my own in packaging it for Extras.
> The advantage is that bugs in it can be pushed upstream. The problem
> is that it may not meet various fedora packaging criteria at some
> point (It has a long comment area at the top of the spec file.)
> 
> Advice?

After a brief look, the included spec file would benefit from major
cleanup and corrections.

E.g. the %post script is just plain ugly. Lots of chown/chgrp/chmod calls
and instructions printed to stdout. All that can go in favour of using
%attr.

The CVS log at the top in addition to the regular %changelog adds another
place where to search for log entries. It requires you to scroll down
before you can see the interesting bits of a spec file.

./configure and its first three arguments could be replaced with %configure.

The %clean section is also over the top. A single "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT"
is enough. Everything else is removed automatically for normal rebuilds.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]