On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Gwenole Beauchesne wrote:

> > How do you deal with this type of files, all are packaged under %doc, 
> > but
> > rpm-build failed: (actually I `rm` it in spec)
> 
> rm it from where? Under $RPM_BUILD_ROOT? Then that's normal, %doc file 
> is not meant to have file "installed" under $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
> 
> So, if you have in your build dir, saysNEWS, simply %doc NEWS, don't 
> install it. This behavior hasn't changed.

Actually it has changed in rpm-4.1 -- rpmbuild is pointing out
'missed' packages which the packager has built but NOT
accounted for.  It is noting sloppy packaging and refusing to
proceed. I consider this a positive feature in cleaning up
quality of packaging.

It is addressed in detail, along with a (not recommended) way 
to prevent it from refusing to certify a 'clean' build at:
   http://www.rpm.org/hintskinks/unpackaged-files/

(sorry about the use of a double negative in taht last 
sentence -- no clean declarative way to state it.)

-- Russ Herrold


Reply via email to