On 3/28/19 6:00 PM, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 10:27 AM Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The upstream spec file is used for anything else than local builds
>> and/or as a reference for the downstream spec file.
>>
>> Knowing that, let's add a build_timestamp to its Release tag so we could
>> generate builds (either via ./prepare-release.sh or, possibly, taking
>> advantage of Copr infrastructure) for the project that can be easily
>> updated every new build and also doesn't clash with the Fedora official
>> builds*. This change may be really helpful for testing management apps
>> code depending on to-be-released libosinfo code.
>>
>> *: The release number was changed from 1 to 0 as official Fedora releases
>> will always use 1. Meaning that users wouldn't face any issue upgrading
>> from a custom generated build to a Fedora official one.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> If this patch gets accepted, I'll propose the same changes for
>> osinfo-db-tools.
>>
>> I'm not totally sure whether I can easily trigger a new Copr build based
>> on commit changes as it'd require a .spec and not a .spec.in, but having
>> this patch in would already help people doing local builds for testing
>> purposes.
>> ---
>> libosinfo.spec.in | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libosinfo.spec.in b/libosinfo.spec.in
>> index fd7e55c..f75e31d 100644
>> --- a/libosinfo.spec.in
>> +++ b/libosinfo.spec.in
>> @@ -1,9 +1,11 @@
>> # -*- rpm-spec -*-
>>
>> +%define build_timestamp %(date +"%Y%m%d%H%M%s")
>> +
>> Summary: A library for managing OS information for virtualization
>> Name: libosinfo
>> Version: @VERSION@
>> -Release: 1%{?dist}
>> +Release: 0.%{?build_timestamp}%{?dist}
>> License: LGPLv2+
>> Group: Development/Libraries
>> Source: https://releases.pagure.io/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
>> --
>> 2.20.1
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libosinfo mailing list
>> Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
>
>
> ping?
>
For virt-manager/libvirt, for maintenance reasons I like to have the git
spec match what we ship in Fedora, minus any patches and the changelog.
Adding this unconditionally to spec file makes syncing spec changes
between upstream git and Fedora/RHEL a bit harder because you will ave
to strip out the build_timestamp setup.
Maybe add a 'make rpm' target that passes in the build_timestamp value
from rpmbuild? Then you can define it in the spec file in such a way
that you don't need to make more manual edits when syncing with distros.
Does that fit your usecase?
Thanks,
Cole
_______________________________________________
Libosinfo mailing list
Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
