On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:00 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 16:12 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway
wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:47 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> >
> > There are variables like build host, build time, file timestamps, file
> > modes, --define's passed to the srpm build, possibly other buildsys
> > configuration variations etc. All of which are sort of cosmetic, but
> > nevertheless result in a different source rpm.
>
> I'm really not worried about cosmetic changes. None of these things
> should affect the binary packages generated from that src.rpm.
--defines end up in various dependencies of the source rpm, which does
not matter as long as one doesn't use its dependencies for anything, but
the specfile's instead. (This is not limited to these packages.)
The original question remains though; what to do with the srpms?
Discard or overwrite the ones already in the repo? My +1 to the former,
or more generally: never overwrite any package in the repository.
Personally, since the buildsystem is going to have to treat
kernel-module-* packages differently, I'd like to see it build them like
this:
When a make build is done in kernel-module-foo/FC-3/, the buildsystem
assembles the sources and makes a SRPM. It then looks at a list (either
generated at buildtime, or preexistant) of the released kernels for
FC-3, and iterates through each of them, running rpmbuild --rebuild
--define "kver $VERSION". At the end of the loop, we should have all the
binary packages and a single SRPM.
~spot
--
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader:
http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!