From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2003-07-21 00:40:30
|
Bjoern Voigt spake unto us the following wisdom: > Ethan Blanton <ebl...@cs... wrote: >=20 > > > -%if %{_vendor} !=3D MandrakeSoft > > > +%if "%{_vendor}" !=3D "MandrakeSoft" > > > > I suppose this is OK ... but will anyone using RPM 3.x realistically > > be able to build gaim these days? >=20 > Hhm, SuSE Linux 8.2 (and probably other United Linux based distros) use > RPM 3.x. Also FreeBSD has only RPM 3.x in it's ports collection (not > much people build rpm's on FreeBSD:-) In practice I don't see much > differences between RPM 3.x and RPM 4.x. Ugh, OK. That one is trivial anyway. > > I didn't include the directories ... I've never understood why one > > needed to do so for non-empty directories. If this is the correct > > thing to do, by all means let us do it. >=20 > For instance, if you write >=20 > /usr/share/sounds/gaim/* >=20 > in spec file and delete the rpm package, then nobody deletes the > directory /usr/share/sounds/. As far I know, directories are deleted, > if you write something like >=20 > /usr/share/* Yeah, I had that explained to me almost immediately, at which point I remembered that I had known that at one time. We'll do that, too. > > Libraries _on Linux_ do not require 755. On some systems they do, and > > RPM is used on systems other than Linux. (not to mention > > capabilities-based systems in Linux, which might require this!) This > > change should not be made. >=20 > Ok, I looked at /lib and /usr/lib. It's true, that the shared > libraries are executable, also on Linux. (Did you ever executed > /lib/libc.so.6? It works!) Yeah, they are traditionally executable even on Linux (and in fact occasionally libraries which are not will trigger warnings during linking or other operations), but Linux does not require this under normal circumstances. > But one the other hand, I don't find >=20 > %attr(755, root, root).../*.so* >=20 > in other spec files. The reason may be, that libtool (or gcc) already > set the execution bit correctly. Then rpm preserves this bit > automatically without %attr. Also *.la files don't need the x-bit, > because only libtool uses it. No, you do not normally find that, and our spec file also did not have that at one time; however, at some (relatively recent) point someone put it into the old spec file, I am assuming because it solved some problem. Because I am assuming it was changed for a reason, I am leaving those mode bits in there. Removing them for the sake of removing them does not make sense. As far as the .la files, I questioned that as well ... but then I checked /usr/lib and virtually all of the .la files there are +x. Thus I left the 0755 in. Again, removing it for the sake of removing it does not make sense; someone put it there for a reason. Ethan --=20 "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." -- Samuel Adams, 1788 |