On May 10, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Eric MSP Veith wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jeff,
I just got the impression YML was the way to go for you to have a
grammar
for *.spec files. It seemed natural to me, since specs and YML
already have
similar looks. I *don't* want any new customized Pimp-my-RPM
features. I
just want to know how *you* want RPM spec files to look like, and
want to
adopt that. (Even if you're going to choose XML, but I'm going to have
headaches then.)
On a more positive note:
The output of
rpm -qp --yaml *.src.rpm
has most of what I've been able to achieve with
a YAML representation for *.spec build recipes.
That content is pretty close to being sufficient
to drive a build, which achieves a split between
a "proper parser" and the build itself using
a source RPM header as an intermediate representation
of the data needed to drive a build.
Producing a SRPM much earlier, before the build
is actually started, would unsnarl the parsing
from the building. OTOH producing a SRPM earlier
is likely too big of a change for most rpmbuild
users to accomodate (the change is very not hard,
involves mebbe 10 lines of code that define the
mostly linear state machine implmented in rpmbuild).
If a build is driven by a SRPM header, many parsers,
YAML, XML, port(1), etc, could be attempted with
a common back-end build/packaging engine driven by the contents of
data carried in a SRPM header.
73 de Jeff
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
User Communication List rpm-users@rpm5.org
