On 01/06/2016 10:21 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 30.12.2015 v 23:13 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
> On 12/30/2015 02:48 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com>
wrote:
>>> I've submitted a review for a separate python-macros package here:
>>>
>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294904
>>>
>>> This is what the FPC approved here
>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/567#comment:12 to be added to the Fedora
>>> buildroots to provide the %python3_pkgversion macro needed for compatibility
>>> with the EPEL Python3 packaging guidelines.
>>>
>>> It also serves the much more important goal of getting the python macros out
>>> of the the individual python? packages to make it easier to update them.
>>>
>> Don't we normally name these something to the effect of
>> "<name>-srpm-macros"? For example, we have
"go-srpm-macros" and
>> "perl-srpm-macros". Shouldn't this be named
"python-srpm-macros" for
>> consistency purposes?
> I guess you're right, though we have a mix at the moment:
>
> blender-rpm-macros.noarch 1:2.76-2.fc24 rawhide
> erlang-rpm-macros.noarch 0.1.4-2.fc23 rawhide
> ghc-rpm-macros.x86_64 1.4.15-3.fc23 rawhide
> ghc-srpm-macros.noarch 1.4.2-2.fc23 rawhide
> gnat-srpm-macros.noarch 2-1.fc23 rawhide
> go-srpm-macros.noarch 2-3.fc24 rawhide
> kde-apps-rpm-macros.noarch 6:4.14.15-3.fc24 rawhide
> kernel-rpm-macros.noarch 36-1.fc24 rawhide
> kf5-rpm-macros.noarch 5.17.0-2.fc24 rawhide
> ocaml-srpm-macros.noarch 2-3.fc23 rawhide
> perl-srpm-macros.noarch 1-17.fc23 rawhide
>
> And some just "-macros":
>
> perl-macros.x86_64 4:5.22.1-355.fc24 koji
> python-macros.noarch 2.7.11-1.fc24 koji
> python3-pkgversion-macros.noarch 1-5.fc24 koji
> sip-macros.noarch 4.17-3.fc24 koji
>
> But it does look like it is the *-srpm-macros that tend to be in the buildroot.
>
And we have rubygem-devel and ruby-devel shipping some macros. I can
hardly understand why the packages should be in separate pacakge and why
there should be (s)rpm or macros mentioned.
Vít
For normal, general use rpm macros I see no reason not to have them in a
-devel package, or perhaps -rpm-macros if there is no -devel package.
But it actually does strike me as appropriate to put only those macros needed
for generating srpms into a -srpm-macros package which redhat-rpm-config then
requires in order to get it into the buildroot, which seems to be the main
current convention.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301
http://www.nwra.com