Bug 431586
| Summary: | minor packaging patch | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Patrice Dumas <pertusus> | ||||||
| Component: | hal-info | Assignee: | David Zeuthen <davidz> | ||||||
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |||||||
| Priority: | low | ||||||||
| Version: | 9 | CC: | mclasen, richard | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2008-12-22 12:22:28 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
Created attachment 294021 [details]
packaging cleanups
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping Does this fix still need applying for F9? if so, please email me and I'll apply the patch into CVS. Thanks. Created attachment 309330 [details]
add HACKING to %doc and keep timestamps
The %dist in changelog is already fixed.
-make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT +make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p' Is this a change that all packages should have? Is there a better (global?) way of doing this? Not that I know of. And also some packager think that keeping timestamps is pointless. (In reply to comment #5) > -make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT > +make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p' > > Is this a change that all packages should have? Is there a better (global?) way > of doing this? This is in the guidelines now http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps In any case seems like hal is deprecated in favor of devKit, so I guess it isn't that much important having a perfect packaging for hal, and this is not really important anyway, I'll close that bug. |
Description of problem: Minor packaging issues/suggestions in a patch * ship HACKING in %doc * don't use %{dist} in %changelog * keep timestamps It seems to me that this package should not use %dist at all, but it is up to you. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: