On Thu, Dec 18, 2008, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> [...]
> OpenPKG is using %{expand: ...}, and that is a lot closer to Doing the
> Right Thing than the Mandriva patch, but both accomplish essentially
> the same goal, adding one more expansion to a parameterized macro
> argument.
> [...]
Yes, and initia
On Dec 18, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
Proyvind was just asking abt integrating this (ancient iirc) Mandriva
patch:
http://www.zarb.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/snapshot/rpm/current/SOURCES/rpm-build-expand-field-for-single-token.patch?root=rpm5distro&view=log
The issue is exactly the sam
Proyvind was just asking abt integrating this (ancient iirc) Mandriva
patch:
http://www.zarb.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/snapshot/rpm/current/SOURCES/rpm-build-expand-field-for-single-token.patch?root=rpm5distro&view=log
The issue is exactly the same macro expansion flaw discussed here
http:/
Jeff Johnson wrote:
It sure would be nice to have %patch as a macro rather
than flip-flopping and jiggering up Yet More Complicated
Silly Stuff, all forcing rpm rpm be recompiled.
The change was supposed to be to macros (and %patch)...
I haven't a clue anymore (because of the number of flip-
It sure would be nice to have %patch as a macro rather
than flip-flopping and jiggering up Yet More Complicated
Silly Stuff, all forcing rpm rpm be recompiled.
I haven't a clue anymore (because of the number of flip-flops)
how patches are applied by rpmbuild.
Can the
#ifndef DYING
sectio
Someone of the rpm5 developer have problem to discuss general rpm topic, and
not only for rpm5 software, on the rpm5 user mailing list ?
FWIW, I have not.
I am convinced that rpm5.org might be the best place where a user can get
answers on topics rpm and package management in general.
At least i
