On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Tom \spot\ Callaway wrote: > On 03/20/2009 04:06 PM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: >> Pity. A %license (ie., like the %doc) field would be nice to have. > > Indeed. This is where I think the most interesting work needs to be > done. Once rpm knows that a %license file is a special type of %doc that > gets installed even if --excludedocs is passed, we have solved one of > the big issues for the OLPC folks.
Heh, actually rpm has had %license special file attribute since rpm 2.5.4, it just doesn't really do much anything at all. It also doesn't play well together with %doc, AND since the ancient copyright -> license tag change, %license as file attribute has gotten globbered with side-effect macro from the License: tag, so you'll have to use %%license in the %files section. Other than that, making --excludedocs not affect %license files is literally a one-liner. Making %license use in spec saner is somewhat more complicated (due to the funny little historical issues listed above). I take it you'd like it to behave exactly like %doc, like %files %doc README NEWS ChangeLog %license COPYING %{_bindir}/* ...which would place COPYING into the default docdir, but with the license attribute set. Right? - Panu - _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel