Ainsi parlait Buchan Milne :
> Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> > Ainsi parlait AAW :
> >>The line:
> >>
> >> %{__cputoolize: %{__cputoolize}}
> >>
> >>should be
> >>
> >> %if %buildfor9_2
> >> %{__cputoolize: %{__cputoolize}}
> >> %endif
>
> A more generic fix may be:
> %{?__cputoolize: %{__cputoolize}}
>
> (ie I think it was a typo)
>
> >>Otherwise the build fails on 9.1 and -- I assume but have no way of
> >>testing -- prior versions. So far this has cropped in in
> >>arts-1.1.3-2mdk.src.rpm and kdelibs-3.1.3-3mdk.src.rpm
> >
> > Backward compatibility has never been an issue for mdk package.
>
> Depends on the packages. Samba still builds all the way down to 8.0
> (tested), and I took a patch from someone who still built on 7.2. Luca
> keeps cyrus-imapd building down to at least 8.2.
And spam-assassin too, i know. But all those cases rely on individual packager
decision, which is plainly wrong IMHO. Either all packages should be
rebuildable, for a given number of previous release, and support should be
provided globally, or none. Current situation make no sense for me.
> > The advantage
> > is that it helps keeping spec files clears. And I doubt just changing
>
> this
>
> > macro call would be enough anyway.
>
> KDE packages all built on 9.1 before this, and possibly earlier versions
> too.
And KDE spec are the most crappiest from the whole distribution. And KDE team
has always argued of difficulty to keep backward compatibility to avoid any
proper package splitting.
--
Guillaume Rousse
The younger the better
-- Murphy's Laws on Sex n�22
