A few more comments below.
On 09/27/2017 12:14 AM, Nesius, Robert A wrote:
Just noticed I did not respond to the list.
On 9/27/17, 12:07 AM, "Nesius, Robert A" <robert.a.nesius(a)intel.com>
> On 9/26/17, 8:11 PM, "Dev on behalf of Allen, Benjamin S."
<dev-bounces(a)lists.clearlinux.org on behalf of bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> wrote:
> - Would it be possible for this special casing to be be baked into one or
more variables of the Makefile of the package, so we can conditionally take action in a
Makefile.common, eg. BUILDTYPE=mock
> Interesting thought.
As said earlier, we use autospec to basically go from `NAME` and `URL`
(hence, the Makefile), to a full spec file, but autospec takes `hints`
in many forms. One of the most important hints is the `build_pattern`
file, that overrides the autodetection that autospec has, since there
are so many projects that appear to have a `simple Makefile` but don't
actually produce anything of significance with it.
> - Should we update the URL variable in the Makefile of
such packages to parse out the upstream URL from the SPEC file if the SPEC is the source
of truth for that package, eg. URL := $(shell grep Source0 linux.spec | tr -d "
" | cut -f 2- -d:)
In practice, it doesn’t matter for us but I see the consistency angle in your
The URL in the Makefile is parsed by some of our tooling to do things
like retrieval of source code files, and update checkers. So, we like to
keep it in sync. Parsing the URL from the spec files has all sorts of
ambiguities associated with it since ordering can be arbitrary (your
main source download could be SOURCE5 and SOURCE0..SOURCE4 could be
patches, for instance).
As we slowly over time release more and more of the release tools and
tooling should come available and this should become clear.