I think it makes sense to have
individual RPMs for each component.
Why? I don't find this objectionable, but I also don't understand the
motivation for it. So here's a temporary NACK until some kind of
non-aesthetic purpose becomes evident.
- Provides subproject specific Makefiles in the top directory, e.g.
Makefile.eap5 and Makefile.rhel6. This will allow each project to
have their own build processes.
They already do, in each subfolder's Makefile.
FWIW, I generally dislike the "SSG" acronym, btw, but it's necessary
sometimes. Something like scap-content-rhel6.rpm
might be more approachable for somebody trying to find the RPM or have
some idea what it contains!
On 01/21/2013 05:46 PM, Shawn Wells wrote:
> Currently we have a single RPM (scap-security-guide.rpm), however being
> there are two subprojects within the SSG, I think it makes sense to have
> individual RPMs for each component.
>
> The patch was to big for the mailing list (because of file renaming), so
> I've posted it here:
>
http://people.redhat.com/swells/0001-RFC-Alteration-RPM-build-process-for...
>
>
> The patch:
>
> - Alters the RPM naming scheme to "ssg-{component}," e.g.:
> * ssg-eap5-0.1.0.el6.noarch.rpm && ssg-eap5-0.1.0.el6.src.rpm
> * ssg-rhel6-0.1-9.el6.noarch.rpm && ssg-rhel6-0.1-9.el6.src.rpm
>
- Provides subproject specific Makefiles in the top directory, e.g.
Makefile.eap5 and Makefile.rhel6. This will allow each project to
have their own build processes.
>
> $ make -f Makefile.eap5 rpm
> $ make -f Makefile.rhel6 all
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list
> scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide