Re: A silly question about our "FC" tag

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:18:27 -0800, Jesse wrote:

> If we did a macro change in dist-f13 and a mass rebuild, and did a macro
> change on dist-f12 and dist-f11 at the same time (without a mass
> rebuild) this might work. 

Only with severe discipline by all packagers who push updates to
multiple branches.

The X%{?dist}.Y scenario is affected, too, for example:

  $ rpmdev-vercmp 0 1.0 3.fc12.1    0 1.0 3.f12.2
  0:1.0-3.fc12.1 is newer

Plus: Changing %dist would open the door for new cvs/koji tags that could
be created without bumping the rest of %release, creating package EVRs
which lose version comparison. Also in Obsoletes/Conflicts/Requires -- and
since %dist is appended to %release, we do have %dist in those tags if
packagers used %release in them.

> I'm not sure I like dist value changing on a
> released Fedora though.

If there were an automated sanity check somewhere as part of the pkg
release procedure, that might help. It would enforce proper %release
bumps.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux