> The more I look/think into this, it seems that --build-in-place should
> entirely disable %prep and all Source/Patch processing, because .. that's
> what's it all about. Or, it should take a copy of the original source
> directory to preserve semi-normal functionality of rpm.
So I haven't really settled on this myself yet. In the systemd case, we have
two types of patches: backports from upstream and downstream patches. The
backports from upstream are of course useless in the --build-in-place scenario,
but the downstream patches are useful to keep sometimes. As an example, systemd
has a downstream patch to match the systemd upstream PAM snippet to match the
Fedora guidelines. That's one patch that is not disabled when the %upstream
macro is defined.
A copy of the original source directory could be rather slow depending on the
project unfortunately, and one of the core benefits of --build-in-place is
being able to do fast rebuilds.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3131#issuecomment-2136786731
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3131/2136786...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
