On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 09:45:49AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Daniel Veillard
<veillard(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 10:25:50AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>> The rule of thumb is that any file generated by config.status
>> is a) reproducible by any user, b) dependent on configure options.
>> Therefore, it is inappropriate to include such generated files
>> in the tarball (for proof, Makefile is generated from Makefile.in;
>> the former is not in the tarball while the latter is).
>>
> [...]
>> diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am
>> index 0b4ae9d..ecc7435 100644
>> --- a/Makefile.am
>> +++ b/Makefile.am
>> @@ -16,9 +16,9 @@ XML_EXAMPLES = \
>>
>> EXTRA_DIST = \
>> ChangeLog-old \
>> - libvirt.spec libvirt.spec.in \
>> + libvirt.spec.in \
>
> Actually that part is wrong. The libvirt.spec need to be in the
> tarball to allow to build rpms from it. This breaks for example "make
rpm".
>
> I reverted that part of the patch,
>
> Daniel
>
Daniel,
Since the Makefile doesn't ship in the tarball but only Makefile.in,
which requires "./configure" be run before "make rpm" be run, that
would mean that you don't need the libvirt.spec to be shipped in the
tarball and you only want libvirt.spec.in and once you run ./configure
it'll generate libvirt.spec. So in fact reverting that change is
incorrect.
Unless of course I'm missing something.
When running:
rpmbuild --ta libvirt-0.9.1.tar.gz
it will look for 'libvirt.spec' inside the tar.gz, therefore we
*must* include it in EXTRA_DIST & the revert was correct.
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|