Re: [Sheflug] suse source rpms

["Alex Hudson" <nospam [at] york.ac.uk>]

>     zzzz> Does SuSE come with an explanation of their own macro's?
>     zzzz> Does SuSE support %{_bindir}, %{_mandir}, etc. use?
>     zzzz> Is # neededforbuild a SuSE extention, and how does it differ
from
>     zzzz> the Prereq: line in Red Hat RPM .spec files?
>
> RPM is Evil.

Is this an official declaration ? ;)

> Check out the changes to bash source _required_ to
> support RPM The Next Mutation on Red Hat Rawhide.  So much for the
> principle of minimal changes to the upstream sources.

I checked rpm.org, and couldn't find anything... what do they need bash
changed for? I thought rpm was able to use several different shells.
Although, I wouldn't necessarily be against such a change - it depends what
the change is needed for. I don't have any problem adding functionality to
software that's required by other software - it may be functionality that
would have been added in the future anyway; it makes no difference (or
shouldn't) who requests it first.

>     zzzz> In short: Are there any SuSE RPM builders out there?
>
> I suppose you can guess I'm not one....

I thought you loved RedHat? ;)

Cheers,

Alex.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.