On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 20:10 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 11:45 -0600, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:08:05 -0600 > > Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > %global commit bd245c9 > > > > > > Source0: > > > > > https://github.com/jukka/pcfi/tarball/%{commit}/jukka-pcfi-%{commit}.tar.gz > > > > > > %setup -q -n jukka-pcfi-%{commit} > > > > I do not understand how this is supposed to work in the face of > > "yum update". > > But if you read his email carefully, Orion isn't speaking about the > version. > So commit will be bd245c9 but the version might very well be > > Version: 20120613git%{commit} > > and as long as the date gets updated, yum will be happy with it. The guidelines actually require an integer before the date/rcs rev part, which should be incremented at every build. Like so: 1.20110102git9e88d7e 2.20110102git9e88d7e 3.20120201git8fg34f6 4.20120201git8fg34f6 It doesn't get reset when you bump the snapshot, to double-plus-ensure that no mess in the snapshot bit of the tag can ever cause problems. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
