Thomas Lotterer wrote:
I remember we put some efforts into moving almost every patch-like "shtool
subst" construct into the %prep section to complement the %patch instructions.
Besides developer's convenience I do not see a reason why automated source
tweaking should be split and partially moved outside the %prep section.
Deferring substitions to the %build section sometimes inhibits repetitive
execution via "rpm --short-circuit" which means a shift would move the paint to
a different location with no real cure.
Hi,
I would agree with Thomas here and I think we will have to consider two
different scenarios in which the shtool subst is used.
First usage is as a patch replacement for fixing bugs and general
problems. Shtools would be used here for the change is simple, can be
done easily and avoids adding an additional patch file to the
distribution. I personally would expect such substitutions to be placed
the same as the patch command.
The second usage is for treating files to adhere to the OpenPKG layout
standards, replacing pathnames , tweaking config files before and after
configure has been run and the like. This should be done in the build
section.
So. to me it looks like there is no general "don't use shtool subst in
%prep" possible.
Just my two cents.
Regards,
Torsten
--
Torsten Homeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.homeyert.net
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
Developer Communication List openpkg-dev@openpkg.org
