Ya looks good to me like I said once Jim's issues are sorted out regards -steve
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 16:08 +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: > On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 16:03 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > > Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: > > > > > I forgot to mention a required part of that idiom: > > You have to be sure to remove both $...@-t and $@ at the > > beginning, or else either redirection (to read-only) > > or mv can fail. So just insert this as the first line of that rule: > > > > rm -f $...@-t $@ > > OK.. i'll do it at commit time once the patch is ACK. > > > > > +rpm: clean > > > + $(MAKE) $(SPEC) $(TARFILE) > > > + rpmbuild $(RPMBUILDOPTS) -ba $(SPEC) 2>&1 | \ > > > + tee .build-$(VERSION).log > > > > Is creating a .build-*.log file like this something standard? > > I would have thought that any logging would be > > done by whoever invokes make, i.e., > > > > make rpm >& .build-whatever.log > > > > It's probably best just to omit that part. > > It is part of the standard make file set that's used in fedora-cvs when > invoking make local or make rpm target that's the equivalent of our make > rpm. > > I don't have strong opinions either way. It can stay, it can go. > > Fabio > > _______________________________________________ > Openais mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
