d:l:p and %{!?license: %global license %doc}

[Bruno Friedmann-2]

I found the macro really useful, allow to write cleaner spec files, and
especially in the rewrite portage of python package to singlespec.

Now the trouble we have in d:l:p is that all SLE12 and less important
42.1,SLE11 failed due to unpackaged directory /usr/share/license

Perhaps we can extend the project repository to include those directory ?

While it is not THAT important it will help to minimize the build failure
number (also why running a build that we know it will fail?)

--

Bruno Friedmann
 Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch
 Bareos Partner, openSUSE Member, fsfe fellowship
 GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227
 irc: tigerfoot


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Bruno Friedmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I found the macro really useful, allow to write cleaner spec files, and
> especially in the rewrite portage of python package to singlespec.
>
> Now the trouble we have in d:l:p is that all SLE12 and less important
> 42.1,SLE11 failed due to unpackaged directory /usr/share/license
>
> Perhaps we can extend the project repository to include those directory ?
>
> While it is not THAT important it will help to minimize the build failure
> number (also why running a build that we know it will fail?)
>

%license should always exist, since when it's not overloaded, it
references the License tag.

In Fedora, we used to use %{!?_licensedir:%global license %doc} for
RHEL < 7 before we shipped a macro that ensured %license worked on
older RHEL in the EPEL macros. Maybe the same thing should be done for
Leap 42.1 / SLE12 and older?



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]