Please play with the last line, marking as comment changes the behaviour
while as non-comment causes another behaviour. Is this maybe another issue?
--- snipp ---
Name: exclude
Version: 0.0.1
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Reproducer for %exclude issue
Group: Documentation
License: GPLv0.2~
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root
BuildArch: noarch
%description
Reproducer for %exclude issue
%prep
%setup -q -T -c
%build
%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/tcl8.5/expect5.43
touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/libexpect5.43.a
touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/tcl8.5/expect5.43/libexpect5.43.a
touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/libexpect5.43.so
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%exclude /usr/lib/libexpect5.43.a
%exclude /usr/lib/tcl8.5/expect5.43/libexpect5.43.a
# Comment in and out the following line for nice effects...
/usr/lib/libexpect5.43.so
--- snapp ---
On Sun, 19 Oct 2008, Robert Scheck wrote:
> is it just me or is it an issue in rpm5.org HEAD that, using %exclude
> /foo/bar in %files causes the result of installed, but unpackaged files
> with mentioning /foo/bar there? Of course this causes an unsuccessfull
> build...
Greetings,
Robert
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List [email protected]
