On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 12:33 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:56:27AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > Roland McGrath wrote: > > >> What's Patch5? > > > > > > D'oh. Meant to nuke that. Inserted for testing purposes -- 'spectool > > > kernel-2.6.spec -p 5 -d "somemacro value"' to verify expected N-V-R's > > > being set properly. Disregard the -v2 patch, use this guy instead. :) > > > (or just drop the Patch5 line out of the resulting spec). > > > > At davej's behest, went ahead and checked this version in, and started > > up a build in koji. Keeping an eye on the build > > (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=55435) so as to fix > > any possible breakage asap. One buglet with make prep already found and > > fixed, yell loudly if anything else crops up. > > > > Otherwise, looking good so far, koji is starting in on building binaries > > now... > > Ick... > > $ rpmvercmp kernel-2.6.22-0.rc7.git1.2.fc8 kernel-2.6.22-0.rc7.2.fc8 > name: kernel = kernel > verson: 2.6.22 = 2.6.22 > release: 0.rc7.git1.2.fc8 < 0.rc7.2.fc8 > kernel-2.6.22-0.rc7.git1.2.fc8 < kernel-2.6.22-0.rc7.2.fc8 This is why Fedora adopted the pre-release versioning scheme that we did: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages In the Fedora scheme, this would be 0.%{X}.%{alphatag} Or, in your specific example: kernel-2.6.22-0.2.rc7.git1.fc8 vs kernel-2.6.22-0.1.rc7.fc8 [root@dhcp-32-74 ~]# /usr/bin/fedora-rpmvercmp Epoch1 :0 Version1 :2.6.22 Release1 :0.2.rc7.git1.fc8 Epoch2 :0 Version2 :2.6.22 Release2 :0.1.rc7.fc8 0:2.6.22-0.2.rc7.git1.fc8 is newer Note that for this to work, you need to increment %{X} upon every new package. ~spot _______________________________________________ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
