rescuecd.spec - problems with sending build request

[Patryk Zawadzki]

2008/3/29 Kamil Dziedzic <kamil.listy at klecza.pl>:
> Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
>  > It's not a valid URI to put in spec. Not if you want to be able to
>  > freely switch between different URI schemas (http:// vs. ftp:// is a
>  > good enough example).
>  Do we need this? Where and for what?

For using distfiles.

>  I know that and this only explains why wget saves files with everything
>  after "?" and also explains why we don't use name given by webbrowser. This is
>  obvious. But this still doesn't explain why you refuse to serve wget encoded
>  name part of URL when downloading from distfiles (especially when builder
>  script could even distinguish if file was downloaded from http or ftp because
>  it has such information in spec - but this is not required).

Soon we will get rpm that is capable of downloading files on its own.
It's likely that it will behave in a more standardized way than wget.
Such URIs will pose a problem at some point in time.

>  Please tell me what this will brake. What will/could fail after encoding name
>  when getting files from distfiles? For me this is correct fix i don't
>  understand why You telling its not? I just want some example;)

See above. wget is not the only downloader on the planet.

>  > If you want to fix anything, I'd suggest fixing the spec by using an
>  > unambiguous URI.
>  Its not unambiguous, its correct. If I write at the beginning http then its
>  obvious that this is a http:// URI. If I will write ftp:// then its obvious
>  that this will be a ftp URI. Builder also has this information and could even
>  decide what to do when getting files from distfiles.

The URI is correct but wget's behavior is non-standard. It should not
include the question mark and the params in the file name and
distfiles/builder should not depend on it.

-- 
Patryk Zawadzki
PLD Linux Distribution