Re: [PATCH] rpm: Fix handling of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
On 10/28/20 9:47 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:49 AM Michal Privoznik
<mprivozn(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/27/20 1:06 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 6:24 AM Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/26/20 11:08 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>>> Contemporary versions of Fedora automatically set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
>>>> based on the changelog entry date stamp. In scenarios where it already
>>>> is defined, we do not want to redefine it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This part is okay.
>>>
>>>> Additionally, when building the libvirt package in an Open Build Service
>>>> instance, the spec file is not present in %_specdir, but instead in
%_sourcedir.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But this looks fishy. Is the %_specdir defined in that case?
>>>
>>
>> It is (that comes from RPM itself), however the directory is empty.
>
> That feels like a bug in OBS then. IIUC this macro can be specified on
> the rpmbuild's cmd line. Can't it set the %_specdir to be the same as
> %_sourcedir?
>
Nothing about RPM mandates that %_specdir is actually *used* for anything.
But this is not the case, is it? %_specdir is defined and points to an
actual directory. Having said that, I am not against the change, but
maybe we can document this weirdness somewhere? Also, with the latest
specfile discussion I'll let Andrea take a look.
Michal