On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 04:43:34AM +0100, Han Boetes wrote: > Some extra notes with this rpm: > > Allas nls was broken in fluxbox and I never noticed it. I only found > out until I tried to update the OpenBSD-port. > > OpenBSD maintains a plackage list with the installs and it is next to > impossible to miss changes because you have to update that list. > > >http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/x11/fluxbox/pkg/PLIST?rev=1.5&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup > > So as an addition to check for uninstalled files I added support for a > plist. > > Ahem now the cvs is down so I can't provide the url :} > > But the filename is fluxbox-plist and in the spec it is marked as %{SOURCE99} > > and at the end of the %install section I added this little script: > > # plist-check script. > cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > find . | sort -f > ../%{name}-plist-check > diff -u %{SOURCE99} ../%{name}-plist-check > ../%{name}-plist-diff || \ > echo "These changes have occured in the package-list." > if [ -s ../%{name}-plist-diff ]; then > cat ../%{name}-plist-diff > echo "Please verify and/or update the package-list: %{SOURCE99}" > exit 1 > fi > > Now after every change in fluxbox I will notice changes in the list of > installed files. > > Yes that's a sort -f; I tested this rpm with ``kelk1'' on #mandrake and > he discovered that in his sort everything was sorted case-insensitive > while on my pc and mdk build-host everything was sorted case- sensitive. > Beats me why but that fixes it. > > Of course this is just a testing version of that script. It's just a > throw up for some more pondering about how to deal with package-lists. > > Questions I am asking myself right now: > > - Why this script and not the %files section of the rpm? > - Perhaps this should be macrofied? > - Will this be a pain to use for non-developpers. I mean suppose > somebody wants to recompile a srpm on mdk8.2 which will result in > another packlist. > - Does this break lsb compatibility? > > > Constructive comments are welcome.
Isn't all this already solved by the unpackaged files test? With the unpackaged files test if you miss a file the build will fail. If you have a file that is extra the build will fail anyway. Thus this probably has already been solved for you. So I'm not sure what the point is for this package list script? -- Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://ben.reser.org "If you're not making any mistakes, you're flat out not trying hard enough." - Jim Nichols
