On Thursday 05 August 2010, Magnus Therning wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:39, Eric Noulard <eric.noul...@gmail.com> wrote: ... > > What is your usage pattern? > > We ship most of our sources as source RPMs since most of our changes are > added patches to upstream (CentOS) RPMs. > > It is just nice to also ship the source of our own code as RPMs rather than > as tar-ball. However, I don't see a big problem with simply dropping use > of CPack and writing the SPEC files manually. It would just be a > nice-to-have is all.
Somehow I don't really understand how a source RPM or source deb generator would make sense for CPack. E.g. a source deb is the plain source package, plus an optional patch, plus a file which describes how to build it. IMO the patch would be always non-existent if generated with CPack (since this generates the package directly from the original source tree), so the only thing left would be to generate the spec file. I guess for a source RPM it's similar ? Alex _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
