[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Source from directory rather than archive



On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 13:43, Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 04/16/2012 09:23 PM, Greg Swift wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 13:21, Panu Matilainen<pmatilai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/16/2012 06:11 PM, Greg Swift wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does no one have a comment on this?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 13:52, Greg Swift<gregswift@xxxxxxxxx>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So... At least in RHEL5 you can build an RPM where the Source points
>>>>> to a directory instead of an archive file (tar, etc), thus removing
>>>>> the need for the %setup macro.  Is this a feature or a "feature" (read
>>>>> bug) ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like a "feature", certainly. Try building a src.rpm from such a
>>> thing, it'll merrily include the empty source directory as a source (or
>>> patch).
>>>
>>
>> That is what I was thinking but wanted to gather input about it before
>> filing a bug.
>
>
> Yup. Note that while adding a sanity check for regular file does make sense,
> it doesn't prevent anything but accidental abuse. Use of %setup or
> Source/Patch is in no way required for any spec, and %prep, %build and
> %install can technically do pretty much whatever they please - things pull
> content from the internet, copy stuff from system or otherwise pre-existing
> directories etc in any case.

ahh the joys of flexibility ;)
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list



[Linux Kernel]     [Red Hat Install]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Watch]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [IETF Discussion]