[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduce an rpm-controlled per-build directory (PR #2885)

[Panu Matilainen]

> Do I understand correctly that the `BUILDROOT` dir was replaced by `%{_builddir}/%{_target_cpu}-%{_target_os}-root`? The `%{_builddir}` is the right move IMHO, but what is the advantage of `%{_target_cpu}-%{_target_os}-root` over `BUILDROOT`, especially when e.g. `SPECPARTS` stays the same.

These details are nowhere near fully thought through, and are certainly debatable and open/subject to change. In my initial patch buildroot was always BUILDROOT, but then experimenting with the vpath build stuff and your own mention about potentially needing multiple build directories made me think perhaps it should match the build directory name, and those are commonly named by the target tuple. 

All that is of course irrelevant within a single rpmbuild run, but down that road far in the horizon one could imagine unpacking the source once, and then executing just the build steps from other hosts using a read-only shared mount of the source. Or (cross-) building on the same host for multiple targets at once. Of course in such a scenario, SPECPARTS would have to be similarly per-arch-os too, it's a valid point.

Wild visions aside, think of the (buildroot) rename more like shaking a tree a bit to see what falls out rather than something decided.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2885#issuecomment-1928974339
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2885/c1928974339 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20240206/546ae666/attachment.html>