[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add bunch of docs on spec tags and file virtual attributes (#1464)

Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) notifications at github.com
Thu Dec 24 13:09:13 UTC 2020


@Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.

Lots of tag capitalization, but also a couple of other minor things...

> +#### Nosource
+#### Nopatch

These should be "cased" correctly as `NoSource` and `NoPatch` (also, we have a `NoPatch`?!?)

> @@ -167,7 +179,109 @@ The end result of all this, though, is that you can't rebuild
 ``no-source'' RPM packages using `rpm --rebuild' unless you also have
 the sources or patches which are not included in the .nosrc.rpm.
 
-### BuildRequires: Tag
+#### Url

`Url` -> `URL`

> @@ -167,7 +179,109 @@ The end result of all this, though, is that you can't rebuild
 ``no-source'' RPM packages using `rpm --rebuild' unless you also have
 the sources or patches which are not included in the .nosrc.rpm.
 
-### BuildRequires: Tag
+#### Url
+
+URL supplying further information about the package, typically upstream
+website.
+
+#### Bugurl

`Bugurl` -> `BugURL`

> @@ -167,7 +179,109 @@ The end result of all this, though, is that you can't rebuild
 ``no-source'' RPM packages using `rpm --rebuild' unless you also have
 the sources or patches which are not included in the .nosrc.rpm.
 
-### BuildRequires: Tag
+#### Url
+
+URL supplying further information about the package, typically upstream
+website.
+
+#### Bugurl
+
+Bug reporting URL for the package.
+
+#### Modularitylabel

`Modularitylabel` -> `ModularityLabel`

> @@ -167,7 +179,109 @@ The end result of all this, though, is that you can't rebuild
 ``no-source'' RPM packages using `rpm --rebuild' unless you also have
 the sources or patches which are not included in the .nosrc.rpm.
 
-### BuildRequires: Tag
+#### Url
+
+URL supplying further information about the package, typically upstream
+website.
+
+#### Bugurl
+
+Bug reporting URL for the package.
+
+#### Modularitylabel
+#### Disttag

`Disttag` -> `DistTag`

> @@ -167,7 +179,109 @@ The end result of all this, though, is that you can't rebuild
 ``no-source'' RPM packages using `rpm --rebuild' unless you also have
 the sources or patches which are not included in the .nosrc.rpm.
 
-### BuildRequires: Tag
+#### Url
+
+URL supplying further information about the package, typically upstream
+website.
+
+#### Bugurl
+
+Bug reporting URL for the package.
+
+#### Modularitylabel
+#### Disttag
+#### Vcs

`Vcs` -> `VCS`

> +#### Bugurl
+
+Bug reporting URL for the package.
+
+#### Modularitylabel
+#### Disttag
+#### Vcs
+
+#### Distribution
+#### Vendor
+#### Packager
+
+Optional package distribution/vendor/maintainer name / contact information.
+Rarely used in specs, typically filled in by buildsystem macros.
+
+#### Buildroot

`Buildroot` -> `BuildRoot`

> +#### Autoreqprov
+#### Autoreq
+#### Autoprov

* `Autoreqprov` -> `AutoReqProv`
* `Autoreq` -> `AutoReq`
* `Autoprov` -> `AutoProv`

> +#### Conflicts
+
+Capabilities this package conflicts with, typically packages with
+conflicting paths or otherwise conflicting functionality.
+
+#### Obsoletes
+
+Packages obsoleted by this package. Used for replacing and renaming
+packages.
+
+#### Recommends
+#### Suggests
+#### Supplements
+#### Enhances
+
+#### OrderByRequires

Isn't this `OrderWithRequires`?

> +Capabilities this package conflicts with, typically packages with
+conflicting paths or otherwise conflicting functionality.
+
+#### Obsoletes
+
+Packages obsoleted by this package. Used for replacing and renaming
+packages.
+
+#### Recommends
+#### Suggests
+#### Supplements
+#### Enhances
+
+#### OrderByRequires
+
+#### Prereq

`Prereq` -> `PreReq`

> +
+Packages obsoleted by this package. Used for replacing and renaming
+packages.
+
+#### Recommends
+#### Suggests
+#### Supplements
+#### Enhances
+
+#### OrderByRequires
+
+#### Prereq
+
+Obsolete, do not use.
+
+#### Buildprereq

`Buildprereq` -> `BuildPreReq`

> +#### Recommends
+#### Suggests
+#### Supplements
+#### Enhances
+
+#### OrderByRequires
+
+#### Prereq
+
+Obsolete, do not use.
+
+#### Buildprereq
+
+Obsolete, do not use.
+
+#### Buildrequires

`Buildrequires` -> `BuildRequires`

> @@ -189,12 +303,81 @@ the libraries to access an ext2 file system, you could express this as
 	BuildRequires: e2fsprofs-devel = 1.17-1
 ```
 
-Finally, if your package used C++ and could not be built with gcc-2.7.2.1, you
-can express this as
+#### Buildconflicts

`Buildconflicts` -> `BuildConflicts`

>  ```
 
+#### Excludearch

`Excludearch` -> `ExcludeArch`

>  ```
 
+#### Excludearch
+
+Package is not buildable on architectures listed here.
+Used when software is portable across most architectures except some,
+for example due to endianess issues.
+
+#### Exclusivearch

`Exclusivearch` -> `ExclusiveArch`

>  ```
 
+#### Excludearch
+
+Package is not buildable on architectures listed here.
+Used when software is portable across most architectures except some,
+for example due to endianess issues.
+
+#### Exclusivearch
+
+Package is only buildable on architectures listed here.
+For example, it's probably not possible to build an i386-specific BIOS
+utility on ARM, and even if it was it probably would not make any sense.
+
+#### Excludeos

`Excludeos` -> `ExcludeOS`

> +
+Package is not buildable on architectures listed here.
+Used when software is portable across most architectures except some,
+for example due to endianess issues.
+
+#### Exclusivearch
+
+Package is only buildable on architectures listed here.
+For example, it's probably not possible to build an i386-specific BIOS
+utility on ARM, and even if it was it probably would not make any sense.
+
+#### Excludeos
+
+Package is not buildable on specific OS'es listed here.
+
+#### Exclusiveos

`Exclusiveos` -> `ExclusiveOS`

> +
+#### Exclusivearch
+
+Package is only buildable on architectures listed here.
+For example, it's probably not possible to build an i386-specific BIOS
+utility on ARM, and even if it was it probably would not make any sense.
+
+#### Excludeos
+
+Package is not buildable on specific OS'es listed here.
+
+#### Exclusiveos
+
+Package is only buildable on OS'es listed here.
+
+#### Buildarchs

`Buildarches` -> `BuildArch`

> +
+Package is only buildable on OS'es listed here.
+
+#### Buildarchs
+
+Specifies the architecture which the resulting binary package
+will run on.  Typically this is a CPU architecture like sparc,
+i386. The string 'noarch' is reserved for specifying that the
+resulting binary package is platform independent.  Typical platform
+independent packages are html, perl, python, java, and ps packages.
+
+As a special case, `BuildArch: noarch` can be used on sub-package
+level to allow eg. documentation of otherwise arch-specific package
+to be shared across multiple architectures.
+
+#### Prefixes

`Prefixes` -> `Prefix` (we don't support plural form)

> +Specifies the architecture which the resulting binary package
+will run on.  Typically this is a CPU architecture like sparc,
+i386. The string 'noarch' is reserved for specifying that the
+resulting binary package is platform independent.  Typical platform
+independent packages are html, perl, python, java, and ps packages.
+
+As a special case, `BuildArch: noarch` can be used on sub-package
+level to allow eg. documentation of otherwise arch-specific package
+to be shared across multiple architectures.
+
+#### Prefixes
+
+Specify prefixes this package may be installed into, used to make
+packages relocatable. Very few packages are.
+
+#### Docdir

`Docdir` -> `DocDir` (also wat? we have this?)

> +
+As a special case, `BuildArch: noarch` can be used on sub-package
+level to allow eg. documentation of otherwise arch-specific package
+to be shared across multiple architectures.
+
+#### Prefixes
+
+Specify prefixes this package may be installed into, used to make
+packages relocatable. Very few packages are.
+
+#### Docdir
+
+Declare a non-default documentation directory for the package.
+Usually not needed.
+
+#### Removepathpostfixes

`Removepathpostfixes` -> `RemovePathPostfixes` (also... we should change this to `RemovePathSuffixes`...)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1464#pullrequestreview-558498149
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20201224/2fbd0cdc/attachment.html>


More information about the Rpm-maint mailing list