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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: BuildRoot



On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 22:52 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:

> In that sense it is safer to use %{buildroot} all over as install
> ... %{buildroot}%{_bindir} resolves to a relative non-existant folder
> while $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir} resolves to /usr/bin on missing
> BuildRoots.

Ack.  But:


On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 23:01 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

> IMHO that's reason enough to make %{buildroot} mandatory in Fedora specs
> (will simplify the guidelines too). Hope the packaging dark cabinet is
> reading this. 

Note that if one uses %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (no matter
how consistently), the end result is a potentially broken mixture due to
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-July/msg00306.html , so one could come to the opposite conclusion, too.


Oh well, pick your poison.  Maybe it's best to just report a bug against
rpm, not set %{_target_cpu} in any recommended/defined buildroots, and
to shrug off for now the corner case concerning simultaneous builds of
the same package by the same user for different archs.  Or just shrug it
off ;)


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