-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/15/2010 07:48 PM, Jon Masters wrote: > On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 14:04 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >> Nils Philippsen said the following on 09/15/2010 03:28 AM Pacific Time: >>> On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 17:13 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >>>> Shouldn't ABRT be looking to a file like /etc/fedora-release to >>>> determine the release version? >>> >>> root@rawhide:~> cat /etc/fedora-release >>> Fedora release 15 (Finian) >>> >>> What you say ;-)? >>> >>> Nils >> >> I guess I'd say, there's a bug in /etc/fedora-release :-) > > Can we get a word from Jesse on this? For context, Jesse, this is my > point that things like ABRT are looking for "15" as the version of > Fedora to file bugs against, based on the release info. But 15 is > rawhide until it branches. So some kind of change is required. Either > the release package is changed, things like ABRT are, or we decide stuff > present pre-branch counts enough toward the final and make the BZ "15". > > Jon. > > fedora-release has always had a number like this, although prior to Fedora 13 the numbering was <previous>.9# as opposed to <next>.0- What may have changed recently was the release code name got changed from Rawhide to something else. This has been changed back, not sure if abrt reads that value or not. The question I have for the abrt folks, is there any code that would lead to a bug being filed for rawhide? If so, how is that code triggered? - -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkySb2EACgkQ4v2HLvE71NVoIgCeJb0CK9mVdZ2/vt4WzWmHzDwu 7tAAnRWztjVVw7Xo3qow/GInSkrFdJtr =geNF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
