[Fedora-packaging] Re: Refining today's "don't touch system fs" guideline

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Fri Oct 13 09:14:47 UTC 2006

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:56:39AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 10:33 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:25:36AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 09:33 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: 
> > > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 06:06:11AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > >  E.g. there exist packages, which want/need to be built "multi-staged",
> > > > > with %build containing (often: temporary) installs to %{buildroot}.
> > > > > In some (very rare) occasions, packages even require "building" inside
> > > > > of %buildroot.
> > > > 
> > > > These are exactly the broken packages that I want to cater with the
> > > > proposed changes!
> > > There ain't anything broken with these packages ;)
> Then I can't avoid replying a bit clearer:
> * The issue you are trying to address is not related at all to our
> original problem ("free of side-effects")

So? Is that the only problem we are interested in solving in this
group? What kind of childish argument is that? Let's become
constructive again.

> * Your proposal does not solve an actual technical problem, to the
> contrary, it artificially introduces new ones.

As said, you're entitled to your opinion. As well as others like
myself are entitled to the opinion that packages writing into
%{buildroot} at any other stage that %install are broken.

If you continue to stiffly argue on technical grounds we'll end up
doing all in %prep. There is no technical reason not to do everything
there, right? No side-effects, the binary results are the same and so
on. You'll probably start removing comments next, since they is no
technically needed. Greetings from homo faber.

Just going into hyperboles to make the point since IMO it is a very
trivial point that shouldn't even need discussion. There are reasons
building and installing software have been seperated in all build
mechanisms, make, rpm, ant, cmake, etc, and arguing that it's
technically not neccessary is nonsense.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20061013/fe7f707b/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list