[Bug 1702] New: Review Request: imagination - A lightweight and simple GTK based DVD slide show creator

[Richard Shaw]

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:50:49 -0500, RS wrote:
>
>> > Once you are certain that you can move the doc files without breaking
>> > anything:
>> >
>> > 2.) Install them into a temporary location and make them available
>> > somewhere below $(pwd), which is within the space of your extracted
>> > package below %_builddir. Clean up and set up that temporary location
>> > in %install. Then you can use %doc to include those doc files. E.g.
>> >
>> > %install
>> > ...
>> > rm -rf %(pwd)/_tmpdoc ; mkdir $(pwd)/_tmpdoc
>> > mv %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name} $(pwd)/_tmpdoc
>> >
>> >
>> > %files
>> > ...
>> > %doc _tmpdoc/*
>>
>> I kinda see show this works, however, till the %doc move it to the
>> right directory this way? I though if it had a path in it, rpm would
>> just mark it as documentation but not move it?
>
> As "_tmpdoc/*" is not an absolute path, %doc copies the file(s) from the
> local build directory and additionally marks them as documentation. Just
> like
>
>  %doc AUTHORS COPYING doc/html README
>
> which also copies those files from the local build dir.
>
> Techniques like this are in use for a long time, so it's not as if I'm
> suggesting something that wouldn't work. ;)

No, I'm not suggesting that at all, but as much documentation as there
is, it all seems to be lacking in certain areas. You have to do a lot
of reading between the lines. I'm really trying to understand how
rpmbuild works but it can be quite convoluted.

So if I understand your example, we're going to move the files out of
BUILDROOT back to BUILD which will prevent us from getting the FILES
INSTALLED BUT NOT PACKAGED or whatever the error is. Then, while
%files is for referencing files in BUILDROOT, %doc will actually copy
files from BUILD. The only thing I can think of to add is that the doc
files are installed in %{_docdir}/%{name}/html. Wouldn't we want to
preserve the ./html directory?

Thanks,
Richard