On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:09:47 -0700 PGNet Dev <pgnet.dev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > on F32, > > date +FORMAT, > date +%Y%m%d_%H%M%S > > returns > 20200703_105351 > > > > as expected. > > in an rpm .spec, if I define > > %define _build_timestamp %( date +%Y%m%d_%H%M%S ) > > and _use_ %{_build_timestamp) _anywhere_ else in the spec, at exec of > any of rpmbuild/mock build/@COPR etc, it appears as > > '20200703_105351OURCE' > > ????? > > Simply changing the define to > > %define _build_timestamp %( date +%Y%m%d_%H%M%S | head -c 15 ) > > 'fixes' the problem, and use of %{_build_timestamp) correctly returns > > '20200703_105351' > > > > Is this a bug in rpmbuild or date? Or a problem in my usage? Remember that '%' introduces a macro expansion, so if that's not what you want, you should escape the '%' as '%%': %define _build_timestamp %( date +%%Y%%m%%d_%%H%%M%%S ) Paul. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx