Jarod Wilson wrote:
> Forewarning: I've not paid attention to the entire discussion, but...
>
> Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> Use a repotag for EPEL4 and EPEL5 like this: add a "%define repotag foo"
>>> in the buildsys, where foo expands to ".epel4" in EPEL4 and ".epel5" on
>>> EPEL5; the repotag macro doesn't get defined in Fedora builders and thus
>>> nothing will change when building a package for Fedora, even if it has a
>>> %{?repotag} in %{release}.
>>
>> Just a tiny detail, picking a random EPEL package:
>> denyhosts-2.6-4.el5.noarch.rpm
>> then it would/could become:
>> denyhosts-2.6-4.el5.epel5.noarch.rpm
>>
>> which I think is redundant, repotag should expand to "epel" only for all
>> versions, so we would have:
>> denyhosts-2.6-4.el5.epel.noarch.rpm
>
> el5.epel still seems a bit redundant. Why not just forget the repotag
> and set the dist tag to epel5?
Regardless, (correct me if I'm wrong), but I thought that the EPEL SIG was
to only make the *policy* decision on yes/no to repotag, and leave the
implementation details to others (like FPC). ???
-- Rex
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
