Hi! On 01.04.2013 15:40, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Something is wrong with how the release number for the F-18 kernel >> package is getting bumped, luckily the actual version is being >> increased most of the time too, not making it matter much, but >> still this is clearly wrong: > There's nothing wrong with it. It's done on purpose. It isn't luck at > play here. The Version is higher, so the release gets reset. > >> [hans@shalem ~]$ rpm -q kernel >> kernel-3.8.3-203.fc18.x86_64 >> kernel-3.8.4-202.fc18.x86_64 >> kernel-3.8.5-201.fc18.x86_64 >> >> Notice how as the kernel versions get newer the release gets >> older ... > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kernel/2013-January/004062.html Questions like this seem to come up every now and then on different mailing lists, forums and IRC since the change that lead to the current behavior was done a few weeks ago. Even experienced packagers seem to get confused afaics. I don't think that's worth the time spend, so I'm going to propose a different solution, even if I know it was shut down with "no more bikeshedding, we found a solution, move on people" or IRC a few weeks ago: Why not simply move the disttag right at the start or %release and then use a normal number behind it as release number (that would have lead to this kernel-3.8.3-fc18.3.x86_64 kernel-3.8.4-fc18.2.x86_64 kernel-3.8.5-fc18.1.x86_64 )? That solves the update path problem when people go from Fedora <something> to Fedora <something+(1|2)> and doesn't involve numbers in the hundreds. Or am I missing something? CU knurd _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
