Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*rfc\s+1\/2\:\s+specfile\:\s+use\s+rpm\s+macros\s+where\s+possible\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*rfc\s+1\/2\:\s+specfile\:\s+use\s+rpm\s+macros\s+where\s+possible\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. rfc 1/2: specfile: use rpm macros where possible (score: 1): Author: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:04:04 +0100 (CET); specfile: use rpm macros where possible This way less places need to be changes (when a developer decides to change it..) after the placeholders have been substituted. Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00238.html (8,355 bytes)
2. Re: rfc 1/2: specfile: use rpm macros where possible (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:25:47 -0600; Fine by me, though I never use the specfile (who does?) I figure most distros have their own specfile to accomodate distro-specific policies, macros, etc. -Eric; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00242.html (7,644 bytes)
3. Re: rfc 1/2: specfile: use rpm macros where possible (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:24:17 -0500; Thanks, I'll put these in. Can you submit equivalent patches for xfsdump and dmapi, too?; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00301.html (7,568 bytes)
4. Re: rfc 1/2: specfile: use rpm macros where possible (score: 1): Author: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:25:20 +0100 (CET); xfsdump and dmapi git repositories seem to have no .spec files.; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00359.html (8,330 bytes)
5. Re: rfc 1/2: specfile: use rpm macros where possible (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:07:31 -0500; build/rpm/xfsdump.spec.in and build/rpm/dmapi.spec.in; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00446.html (8,662 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 5
Page: [1]