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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] PHP guidelines

On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 12:04 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> On 7/25/06, Ville Skyttä <ville skytta iki fi> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 18:26 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> > > Also Ville insists on their being a %build section for an unknown
> > > reason.
> >
> > I did provide a reason, you seem to choose to ignore it.
> Well you keep referencing a bug number with your argument and the
> comments made in the bug you refer to seem to suggest my point of view
> rather than yours.  Basically the bug reporter simply did not know
> what he was doing.  So this bug that you refer to basically
> invalidates your claim that there is a problem with not adding %build.
>  So you provide some reason, then invalidate this reason with a bug
> number and therefore you provide an unknown or null or void or
> canceled out reason.  Kind of like when matter collides with
> anti-matter...

Bug#192422 is showing that specs without %build can trigger unexpected
behaviour.  The bug reporter did know what he was doing, he just didn't
know that rpm had a bug in it that prevented it from working as

So it's better to anticipate that there might be other unexpected things
when shipping without %build (either there now or added in the future
when the rpm maintainer decides: debuginfos do it this way, I might as
well make feature X do it that way as well) rather than letting
everything work for the trivial cases we're dealing with now and then
suddenly expose another bug somewhere down the road.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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