Am 12.02.2015 um 17:33 schrieb Wietse Venema:
li...@rhsoft.net:
Am 12.02.2015 um 17:18 schrieb Wietse Venema:
li...@rhsoft.net:
Am 12.02.2015 um 17:08 schrieb Wietse Venema:
li...@rhsoft.net:
according to the subject a "You MUST use make non-interactive-package"
would have saved a lot of noise including the completly unnecessary
flames about "rpm crap" without *by all respect* no clue about how it
works and that the macros are replaced before any bit of postfix source
could face them
I provide the interfaces. It is your job to choose the right one.
not when you say "You MUST use THAT" because if i try to mangle that
because it just don't work you would repsond "did i say this and that?"
Without a clear statement what you want (build installable package)
I have to guess that you want to install Postfix. The supported
interface is "make whatever". People who grope under that interface
are lucky if I provide any support at all.
can we stop that discussion and both admit that we handeled the issue
not really good? "Without a clear statement what you want" when the
subject begins with "rpmbuild"? seriously? :-)
You are like people who ask "I use Sendmail or qmail or Exim feature
X, how do I do that with Postfix?", without a clear statement of
what X does. I am not interested in how rpmbuild works.
well, you are not able to admit a mistake, so be it
"Without a clear statement what you want (build installable package)" is
ridiculous because "rpmbuild" is an as clear as possible statement that
the goal is "build installable package" as well you do not need to be
interested in "how rpmbuild works"
but than you should not insist in "remove the crap of macros" while the
person on the other side is knowing how it works and that there is no
technical differene between something=/path/ or something=%{path_macro}
besides you have to type that only once on top, reuse it in the rest of
the file and if you change a value it's consistent everywhere
