https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287846 --- Comment #7 from mreynolds@xxxxxxxxxx --- > > > > Why? Please explain. Since "release" gets %{?dist} I can not reuse > > "release" for the source code version/layout. Using "prerel", or some other > > variable, would make future maintenance easier since there are several > > places that reference it. > > I don't understand your need to make a 'prerel' macro when you can directly > set Release as 1%{?dist}. > > Can you do a example? Sure, so the "full" version is lib389-1.0.1-1 The source code is named and packaged this way (just like what we do in 389-ds-base), but when I used %{?dist} it changes to: lib389-1.0.1-1.f22 for example. This is not how the source is laid out(withe dist extension), thus I can not use it in most of the spec file. Then when I do my next minor release it will be: lib389-1.0.1-2. Using a macro I only need to bump this number up in one place - not in three places. It's no big deal, I just manually set it where it's needed (see my latest spec file I updated earlier) > > > > > > General Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines > > > > Note - these docs say to follow(as closely as possible) the rpmdevtool > > templates for spec files - these are obviously now outdated as you pointed > > out various issues in my spec file which directly came from these templates. > > 'rpmdevtools' is updated. > > $ rpmdev-newspec -r 4.13 test.spec I was referring to: /etc/rpmdevtools/spectemplate-python.spec > > (where 4.13 is current RPM release in Fedora) makes a very clear and minimal > spec file. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review