| Re: [Sawfish] Patch for sawfish.spec.in |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/sawfish Archives
]
- To: sawfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Sawfish] Patch for sawfish.spec.in
- From: Allan Duncan <amd2345@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 23:29:39 +1000
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com.au; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mesmtp; bh=cZwX85yYuPxucPJ9FBKPaQxusP4=; b=BXE6q/5fPynTrQLDGFT/WVONP5Uj dF4jtEbBzWr6nD5fzZOXIUB40chajrd2CGsu+26k7cDKQWvNHNuEtZcyIYh28GH5 7+hmvTRQpZQWbrA++mah/AyMYSIJZPfb/otmbfNM5YDgbQdIopjNrT9X147pAOAG DvkTW4pUlEzofOk=
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=cZwX85yYuPxucPJ9FBKPaQ xusP4=; b=HnEZBJBlaHg802DBNI7RObOUxVmi9m0bKDL3dTRKtsGX6fojoM8o8D gLCLiT8emaLrnQKHW9/xevkH/+VRSCLUBrT7a2owF4izPet144mUlLBaTF6ZxaXB KGJo6/YpC3hobJAt5LrmbvPch2TPFX1P+VPm+NJXvJXjZiPA+LAR4=
On 22/04/14 21:32, Kim B. Heino wrote:
This patch updates sawfish.spec.in to match the Fedora one, plus a
couple of tweaks for inserting News and running autogen.sh
Please note that Fedora's spec uses release tarballs, not github
snapshots.
I may not have made it clear - the Fedora spec in the tarball (loaded
from the .src.rpm)
was clearly NOT derived from the sawfish.spec.in in the tarball.
+/bin/sh autogen.sh --nocfg
As far as I remember, autogen was only needed for snapshots.
True - there appears to be some tweaking of the snapshot on its way to
the release, generating configure and a Makefile, and NEWS below.
Btw, wouldn't the Makefile be suspect at that point? It does get
over-ridden when configure is run.
+/usr/bin/makeinfo --no-validate --no-headers man/news.texi >NEWS
This sounds dangerous for release tarballs.
The big question is: Should spec file be used for snapshots or release
tarballs? Both would be best, so I suggest:
1) There should be some kind of test is autogen is needed or not.
Sounds good, but how? I'm a mere dabbler in rpmbuild specs.
2) Don't update NEWS.
NEWS already exists as the .texi, why shouldn't it pass to the install?
The release tarball includes it, and it in fact includes instructions on
how to generate it from the .texi :-)
+* Tue Apr 22 2014 Allan Duncan
This line is missing version number.
I thought about that and decided that it is up to the maintainer to bump
the version if it is
warranted, so the version number is unchanged from below. Should I have
included a repeat?
--
Sawfish ML