To sort of answer my own question... It isn't %build that's important. There simply must be some other section between %prep and %install.
What I think happens is this: The parser is running through %prep, doing whatever it does (expanding macros and building the script that will be executed, I guess). It sees %install, which is defined as a macro, so it goes to expand it. At that moment, %buildsubdir hasn't actually been defined as a macro because rpm is still parsing and hasn't executed anything (specifically the magic %setup macro). So because %buildsubdir is not defined, %install just expands to... %install. An easy way to test this is to just move the %check section up above %install. And... it works. Even just adding an empty %clean section works fine. So I guess this is down to two things: * RPM parsing is deep magic and will hurt your brain. * Redefining the section "macros" is a recipe for "fun". I have no idea if this weirdness would be considered a bug. I'll file a ticket if someone thinks it's worth it, but outside of R packages, I would expect there to be relatively few archful packages that would legitimately not have a %build section. - J< _______________________________________________ Rpm-ecosystem mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem
