@pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> +without the parenthesis defaults to configuration. In other words,
+these two lines are exactly equivalent:
+
+```
+BuildOption: --enable-fu
+BuildOption(conf): --enable-fu
+```
+
+Passing these per-section options to the actual buildsystem of the
+package is the responsibility of the buildsystem specific macros.
+
+3) Complex packages can have things like multiple build systems, in
+which case you might want to invoke the macros manually, eg.
+
+```
+%buildsystem_autotools_build
Yup. It's ugly, but we really need to namespace those macros so it can't be
helped much.
For the case of multiple buildsystems in a single package that is.
For just manually invoking a random snippet from an active BuildSystem I do
have a solution: macro aliases, where you only need to say `%buildsystem_build`
to manually invoke the right thing. That was part of an earlier version but
left it out because the need for that case is much lower in this new, properly
declarative system.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2774#discussion_r1446101484
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2774/review/1811172...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
