[Fedora-packaging] Updated kernel-module-packaging example with ndiswrapper (Was: example kernel-module package)

[Tom 'spot' Callaway]

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 22:34 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 09:30 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 21:01 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > 
> > > > 1) create the debug-pkg ourself and don't rely on the internal rpm
> > > > solution.
> > > [...]
> > > > If 1) is easy I'll vote for that.
> > > 
> > > I tried, was not that hard (if I didn't miss anything). Results are
> > > found at
> > > http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/MISC.fdr/kernel-module-example/
> > > in the wiki at
> > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/KernelModuleProposal
> > 
> > I like this approach the best.
> 
> I like that too, but the dilemma with the same-NEVR'd source rpm
> persists.  I'm not sure if it's a design goal or a design flaw, but the
> little (ha!) pedant in me says it's the latter.  To clarify:
> 
> - kernel-module-foo-1.0-1.src.rpm in repo
> - check out the package from CVS, build for a new kernel
>   -> get another kernel-module-foo-1.0-1.src.rpm which != the original

Why would the src.rpm not be the same as the original? The spec file and
source tarball should be consistent, and not affected by a rebuild.

~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!