Thanks, I have no problems adding this as long as we keep the FHS style as default. I guess others on this list will be happy about this change.
Actually the in-/usr installation is FHS too... it's the admin's decission what they consider to be part of their core system vs. an "add-in" package. This isn't just splitting hairs... at large-site installations almost always what the IT folks will install is not "RedHat 9" but "BigCorp customized RedHat 9 + some Mandrake and 50 local packages, using a custom kickstart install setup." That's the beauty of open source... it's infinitely customizeable. Thanks for giving me a nice base RedHat, but I'll take it from here... and the result will be mine, I can even redistribute it as "Botz Linux" if I want. Bincimap is a core package in Botz Linux. ;-)
At the top of the spec file I see that the version and release can be sent
as parameters. Is this very useful? One rpm/src.rpm will have a fixed
release/version (at least from my view). Did you have a need in particular here?
With parameterized packages it makes sense to be able to change at least the release without editing the spec file... i.e.
rpmbuild --without ssl --define "release 2" -ba SPECS/bincimap.spec rpmbuild --with ssl --define "release 2ssl" -ba SPECS/bincimap.spec
gives you two different packages. Also, aside from the explicit parameters I added, there are other things you can change about a package without editing spec... i.e. optimization with CFLAGS (rpm will pick it up from the environment), etc.
:j
