On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
That's one way of looking at it. Another would be that SLE is loosing external packaging efforts, because its maintainers are reluctant to include the most obvious changes that would make packaging for it WAY more easier (correct %make_install macro, noarch subpackages, pkgconfig support, to give a few examples).
"noarch" subpackages whould mean to update to a newer rpm version, with lots of compatibility issues. Adding new macros should be ok. (And yes, compatibility *is* an issue for SLES customers.) BUT: It makes no sense to do this in the project config, as that means that the customers can't recreate the package from the source rpm.
Or put it in another words: it's pretty useless for SLE, but works fine for distros that are not using obsolete version of RPM and macro definitions (openSUSE, Fedora and all RHEL clones).
Is RHEL really different to SLES in that regard? Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org