Closed jordansissel closed 9 years ago
Do you want to pull over the whole codebase?
What I would like to keep is the simple cd /recipes/zeromq && fpm-cook
workflow and the ports-tree like layout where you put patches, init scripts etc. in one directory.
In your example command, does fpm know the recipe location?
In general, I like the idea of a tighter integration with fpm!
I haven't figured out the implementation of it yet, mostly thinking about how users will interact with the tool.
Something like: fpm -s recipe -t rpm zeromq would:
On the flip side, reducing the workflow to "building packages" hurts the original homebrewlike workflow of 'brew create
Closing this because it's not going to happen I guess. :smile:
Thanks to the diligence of @NicholasBHubbard, we are making good progress with several long-standing FPM issues.
@bernd & @jordansissel What is the bare minimum that needs to happen, from both the fpm side & the fpm-cookery side, in order for us to finally move forward with the "real SRPM" (not "fake SRPM") solution described in the discussion linked below? https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/237#issuecomment-415941828
My massive refactor of FPM is almost done. I was thinking:
Will use a cookery recipe to produce an rpm of zeromq. Thoughts?