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

Fernando Nasser fnasser at redhat.com
Tue Feb 13 17:00:01 UTC 2007

Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Monday 12 February 2007 10:52, Joe Orton wrote:
>> 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.
> +1
> We have the spec stubs that have an acceptable buildroot tag for new packages, 
> I don't see much value in harping on existing packages for the BuildRoot.

So, what is the current procedure.  We have 150 Java packages that would 
need to have the -%(%{__id_u} -n) appended.

Can the reviewers waive that bit until we have a final (and better) 
solution to our buildroot?

Or perhaps we could make it a mass automated rebuild to replace all 
BuildRoot: in all packages?

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list