Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for bare `%package` (Discussion #2959)
I don't know anything about Debian, but yes, having binary package of different name is one of the motivations. But to me, this is optional depending if this scenario was supported. Nonetheless, I think that being able to define subpackages before preamble is beneficial on itself and it would help to remove hacks such as: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/blob/b7d1bfae1fb673c4d8a21a8866ba4e37b2cd6eaf/f/common.lua#_217-235 (and it does not mean that I necessarily defend purpose and implementation of those macros) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2959#discussioncomment-8975559 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for bare `%package` (Discussion #2959)
So is the idea to be able to mimic the `debian/control` style of the top preamble actually being for the source package only, and then a bare `%package` section for the binary package of the same name? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2959#discussioncomment-8974431 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for bare `%package` (Discussion #2959)
I wish you could elaborate more. From your answer, I am not able to deduce 1. If you like / not like the idea if you were free from current implementation 2. What it would take to change the implementation 3. If there are any hopes or not -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2959#discussioncomment-8841037 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for bare `%package` (Discussion #2959)
The main package preamble has to come first, the rest of the spec parser is built on top of that assumption. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2959#discussioncomment-8839919 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for bare `%package` (Discussion #2959)
Could there be added support for bare `%package`, without any argument or
option? Several reasons I can think of.
1) Having plain `%description` / `%files` without its `%package` counterpart is
asymmetric
2) Having bare `%package` somewhere in the .spec file could allow to use the
original preamble (if present) just in SRPM context.
3) Having bare `%package` would allow to place the main package declaration
freely in .spec file.
The third point is actually my original motivation related to #2892. I believe
that if I replaced the `License:` tags by some macro, I could likely accumulate
the licenses and use them in the `%package` which would be listed as last. This
in turn would likely allowed me to conditionalize the sub-package existence.
IOW the most naive (and incomplete) example could look like this:
~~~rpm-spec
%package libs
Summary: foo-libs
%description libs
foo-libs description
%package
Summary: foo
Name: foo
Version: 1
Release: 1%{?dist}
License: MIT
%description
foo description
%files
%files libs
%changelog
~~~
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2959
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
