Re: [Ltib] .spec vs .spec.in

[Stuart Hughes]

Hi Kevin,

.spec.in are used for spec files that require their main body from a
template (such as kernel-common.tmpl, u-boot-common.tmpl).  That is they
have no build/install/.. sections.

If you look at any existing .spec.in, you'll see a line like:
# Template = kernel-common.tmpl
or
# template = u-boot-common.tmpl

This tells LTIB to join together the .spec.in and the common template
file.

The advantage of this is that you can have a common build recipe for all
the different kernels/u-boots.

I would recommend that your kernels/u-boots use the common templates for
building and you use .spec.in spec files.

Regards, Stuart

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 20:37 +0100, Kevin Wells wrote:
> I have a question on the use of .spec and.spec.in extensions in the
> dist/lfs-5.1 area.
> 
>  
> 
> For my u-boot spec file, the extension is simply .spec and works fine.
> 
> The kernel directory (and just a few other individual files) use
> the .spec.in extension.
> 
> To be consistent, I've made my kernel spec file with the same
> extension (.spec.in), but I can only build if I use a .spec extension.
> 
> Reviewing a few of the main.lkc files in other packages that
> use .spec.in , I don't see a difference between my choice of the .spec
> file and those other packages.
> 
>  
> 
> I used the following in main.lkc:
> 
> CONFIG PKG_KERNEL
> 
>                 string
> 
>                 default "kernel-2.6.27.8-phy3250" if KERNEL_2_6_27_8
> 
>  
> 
> When rpbuild is exeuted for kernel processing, it always uses
> the .spec extension instead. I'm sure it's something simple. Any
> ideas?
> 
>  
> 
> Kevin Wells
> 
> NXP Semiconductors
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LTIB home page: http://bitshrine.org
> 
> Ltib mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ltib