Funny....
If beehive has little to nothing to do with the build, why does it
have to be factored into spec files?
Hardly a glorified cron job or meta-foo
By the fact that spec files have to accommadate beehive it clearly
shows that beehive is indeed a big factor in the RH/Fedora binaires.
ta.
On 6/7/05, Curtis Doty <Curtis(a)greenkey.net> wrote:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>yes. All the scripts needed to control the compilation and installation
>of the executable is in the src.rpm perfectly fine.
>
>
I find myself always adding something like:
--- kernel-2.6.spec 2005-05-17 16:50:40.000000000 -0700
+++ kernel-2.6gk.spec 2005-05-30 18:58:15.000000000 -0700
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
%define sublevel 11
%define kversion 2.6.%{sublevel}
%define rpmversion 2.6.%{sublevel}
-%define rhbsys %([ -r /etc/beehive-root -o -n "%{?__beehive_build}" ]
&& echo || echo .`whoami`)
+%define rhbsys %([ -r /etc/beehive-root -o -n "%{?__beehive_build}" ]
&& echo || echo .`whoami`@`hostname -s`)
%if %{FC3}
%define release %(R="$Revision: 1.27 $"; RR="${R##: }"; echo
${RR%%?})_FC3%{rhbsys}
%endif
It sure would be nice if the Red Had specfile maintainers took us into
consideration. .. Those of us who don't have access to the Red Hat IP
known as beehive. .. And have no problem managing our own parallel build
environments.
../C
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list