Simple Package Modification

My 2ct's on the new build architecture

1. Is it normal behavior for 'make clean' to not remove the noarch folder and RPMS in there as it does remove the SRPM?
2. Is it normal for make to create a SRPM in the root of the branch (package-name/contribs7/) and the noarch RPM in a noarch folder? Shouldn't it be desired to build the SPRM in a seperate folder as well?

Normally you shouldn't need to worry about the rpms produced. The build system needs packages in a specific place so it knows where to look for them. The single srpm is used to build multiple arch packages so it makes sense for it to be at the root. All the packages that are created for each arch end up under that arch directory. For a single noarch it doesn't look very clean but when you are build against 2-5 different archs and each arch produces 3-10 packages it makes it very nice to be organized in this fashion. — Slords (talk • contribs). 10:05, 25 December 2007 (MST)

Now off to learn cvs (as mezzanine was a very nice shell hiding my lack of cvs knowledge) - Cactus 05:07, 25 December 2007 (MST)

Emphasize the need for the common folder

I think we need to clearly document that you at least need to check out the common folder for the build system to work, am I right? - Cactus 06:51, 25 December 2007 (MST)

The common folder doesn't need to be specifically checked out. The make file is smart enough to check for a common folder and if it doesn't find one then it will automatically check it out. The instructions for checking out the common folder in the rpms directory make it so that the make file won't check out a common folder for each and every package you work on. — Slords (talk • contribs). 10:05, 25 December 2007 (MST)

Releasing a package

Do we need to manually delete old packages from smetest and smecontribs

I don't have permission to do so,

-rw-rw-r-- 3 releases releases 

Snoble 17:36, 1 March 2008 (MST)