On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 11:48:52PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 23:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : > > adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent "complex" font package > > but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order > > in all font packages. The general pattern is the same but packagers have > > different tools and habits so slight variations exist. > > Anyway here is one occurence of what I worried about in all its glory > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=130814 > Yep.
So, while less than ideal from your standpoint of putting the definition of
the subpackage together with the call to the macro, does rearranging things
like this do the trick?
[Package info]
[subpackage info]
%prep
[prep stuff]
%build
[build stuff]
%install
[install stuff]
%_font_pkg -n 2 -f %{fontconf}-2.conf AccanthisADFStdNo2-*.otf
Since %_font_pkg is creating %files sections and %pre and %post sections,
that seems like both a valid workaround and where you'd look for those
declarations in a non-font package.
-Toshio
pgpNSwiAj4UUi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
