[Mageia-dev] [packages-commits] [189967] - version upgrade

Thu Jan 5 20:47:15 CET 2012

Le 05/01/2012 20:36, Matteo a écrit :
+> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
+> Hash: SHA1
+>
+> Il 03/01/2012 17:30, Guillaume Rousse ha scritto:
+>> Le 03/01/2012 17:18, Jani Välimaa a écrit :
+>>>> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
+>>>>    Group:        System/Kernel and hardware
+>>>>    BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-buildroot
+>>>>    URL:        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/projects/x86info/
+>>>> -Source0:    %{name}-%{realver}%{?cvsdate:-%{cvsdate}}.tar.bz2
+>>>> +Source0:    %{name}-%{realver}%{?cvsdate:-%{cvsdate}}.tgz
+>>>>    Patch0:        x86info-1.17-intel-flags.patch
+>>>>    Patch1:        x86info-1.17-intel-caches.patch
+>>>>    Patch2:        x86info-1.17-cpuid-with-ecx-input.patch
+>>>> @@ -33,17 +33,18 @@
+>>>>    %setup -q -n %{name}-%{realver}
+>>>>
+>>>>    %build
+>>>> -make CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
+>>>> +#make CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
+>>>> +%make
+>>>>
+>>>>    %install
+>>>> -rm -rf %{buildroot}
+>>>> -install -d %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
+>>>> -install -d %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1
+>>>> -install -m755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/
+>>>> -install -m755 %{name}.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/
+>>>> +%__rm -rf %{buildroot}
+>>>> +%__install -d %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
+>>>> +%__install -d %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1
+>>>> +%__install -m755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/
+>>>> +%__install -m755 %{name}.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/
+>>>>
+>>>
+>>> I think this is pretty much opposite what everyone else is doing. IMHO
+>>> this also makes .spec harder to read.
+>> Morevoer, it mixes pure cosmetics changes, as some of those macros just
+>> expand to the command itself, as install vs %__install,
+> Hi Guillaume,
+> I'm sorry, but I don't think that /usr/bin/install it's equal to
+> 'install'. There are technical reasons to avoid these macros? Can you
+> suggest me some reference, please? I'm not able to find nothing about
+> this topic.
+Just readability, and consistency with other packages. There is no 
+advantage to justify this additional complexity here.
+
+>   with behaviour
+>> changes, as other macros expand to the command with additional
+>> arguments, as make vs %make, which is actually make -j.
+>>
+> So if I need to invoke make -j what should I do?
+> Again, excuse me -I'm not so skilled- but why should I avoid to call
+> make using -j option?
+>
+> Be patient, please :-)
+You shouldn't. You're supposed to use %make, not 'make' nor '%__make'. 
+The problem is just to mix cosmetic and non-cosmetic changes in a single 
+commit.
+-- 
+BOFH excuse #281:
+
+The co-locator cannot verify the frame-relay gateway to the ISDN server.
+