[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0904271752090.18696-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:54:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: usbutils 0.81 release
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 22:48, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >> Kay Sievers (11):
> >> Â Â Â rename configure.in -> configure.ac
> >> Â Â Â delete spec file
> >
> > Why delete the spec file? Â Don't you want to keep it for people who
> > would like to build an RPM?
>
> Spec files are much too distro specific, they all contain custom
> distro variables, reference package names which are not the same
> across distros. They usually don't even agree on the directories the
> stuff is installed into. The usb.ids file as an example, is in a
> different location on every distro i have seen. :)
>
> There is in most cases no point in keeping outdated spec files or
> debian directories in upstream source packages. The best when updating
> a package, is to start with the one that is in the source rpm of the
> distro one uses.
But what if the distro doesn't ship that package at all? Then it's
good to at least have a starting point that you can adapt to your own
needs. (Although I don't know of any major distributions that doesn't
include usbutils...)
This isn't a big deal. If you and Greg don't want to include a spec
file then don't.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists