[Fedora-packaging] Re: Wrong buildroot ...

Joe Orton jorton at redhat.com
Mon Feb 12 15:52:18 UTC 2007

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:05:07AM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 10:41:44AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 14:53 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > e) True arguments are that
> > >    obscuring the buildroot for the sake of an extremely rare
> > >    corner case (several users building the same package on the
> > >    same system w/o chroots) implies fixing it for far more not
> > >    corner-cases like building i386 and x86_64 packages
> > >    simulataneously. So the `id -nu` part is far less important
> > >    than adding the target arch, but that was silently forgotten by
> > >    racor
> > > 
> > Is your suggestion to add arch to the buildroot?
> No, my suggestion is to loose up on requirements on buildroots. There
> is no known problem ever caused by choosing a "wrong" buildroot even
> by novices, and we're definitely over-engineering in fixing stuff that
> never broke.

I completely agree with that.  Unless the buildroot is picked by 
mkdtemp() you can't really *guarantee* avoidance of conflicts.  If you 
want a guarantee then rpmbuild should be fixed to ignore BuildRoot and 
use mkdtemp() instead.  Standardising an inadequate workaround and 
having packagers go through fixing N hundred spec files to match seems 
like a waste of time.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list