The current behavior of `%exclude` is a feature and should not be incompatibly
changed.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> Just like compilers do.
I am also complaining just the same way about compilers doing this. Your
"closing loopholes" is your users' incompatible changes that unnecessarily
break their builds.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly
I think your definition of "necessary" differs significantly from mine. RPM
will not break down if this incompatible change is not made (or reverted, now
that you pushed it), so I do not see why it is necessary.
And to give some context: as a maintainer of [TIGCC](http://tigcc.ticalc.org/),
I
Again: how is this an improvement? I have seen many specfiles deliberately
using `%exclude` in the way that you are now prohibiting. This is an
incompatible change making packaging unnecessarily harder. And Miro @hroncok
even posted a case where the obvious fix (using `rm` instead) won't work
