Michael Schroeder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 03:37:23PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > + /* If buildroot is not set, set to a default value. */
> > + if (!spec->gotBuildRootURL) {
> > + int err = setBuildRoot(spec,
> > "%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)");
> > +
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > + }
>
> If you can set a default buildroot in /usr/lib/rpm/macros, why
> is there a need to *insist* on a buildroot? This breaks
> compatibility.
This would only trigger if:
a) no default buildroot is passed via --buildroot
b) no default buildroot is set via macros
c) there is no BuildRoot: line in the spec file
Is having a default (rather than *no*) buildroot in that case behavior that
we want to preserve?
Bill
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
