packages: gdk-pixbuf2/gdk-pixbuf2.spec - +x libpixbufloader-*.so, - removed...

[Jakub Bogusz]

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 11:31:07PM +0100, Tomasz Pala wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 22:50:44 +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> 
> >> -%{__rm} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/%{abiver}/loaders/*.la
> >> +rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/%{abiver}/loaders/*.la
> >> +rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/libgdk_pixbuf{,_xlib}-2.0.la
> >>  
> >> -%{!?with_apidocs:%{__rm} -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_gtkdocdir}}
> >> +%{!?with_apidocs:rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_gtkdocdir}}
> > 
> > %{__rm} is intentional here.
> > 
> > rm -f doesn't fail if specified file/directory doesn't exist.
> 
> Why should it fail?

We don't want to keep hundreds of obsolete rms - nobody checks such
commands on upgrade unless build fails.

> And if we want so - why not plain rm without -f?

%{__rm} is defined as "rm --interactive=never".
Plain rm can ask for deletion if file has read-only mode.


-- 
Jakub Bogusz    http://qboosh.pl/