rpms/xforms/devel

[Rex Dieter]

Warren Togami wrote:

> XFree86-devel and xorg-x11-devel will seize to be a package or even 
> virtual provide in FC5 when modular X hits the repository, so you will 
> need to find another way to do this anyway.
> 
> This spec line is wrong for these reasons, and maybe more:
> 
> 1. It is also generally against Fedora practices to allow a spec to be 
> backwards compatible with old and unsupported releases, especially when 
> supporting those old distros necessitates ugly hacks like this.

This statement sounds like "Fedora practices" should be to purposely 
break things for older releases.

Let me put it a nicer way:
Compatibility with older/unsupported releases can be maintained, 
provided it doesn't require much undo effort.

> 2. Querying rpmdb during rpmbuild for any reason is wrong and should be 
> avoided.

If you say so (I don't agree, but it's not worth arguing, since it can 
be a source of abuse).  I guess I'll have to use the %fedora macro instead.

> 3. This parsing will fail with an exit code where XFree86-devel is not 
> provided.  This means it will fail when parsing in a minimal buildroot 
> (mock), and FC5 where XFree86-devel doesn't exist at all.

Right, if XFree86-devel isn't available, build fails.

-- Rex