>>>>> "MH" == Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
MH> Is this something that we actually want? E.g. I was quite surprised
MH> by the behavior.
What about it is surprising? You remove the bootstrap bit and without
changing anything else you have a package which sorts newer than the
previous with-bootstrap package. Even though we haven't yet run short
of integers, I can see the utility in this.
MH> When I bootstrap, should I manually bump the release number or let
MH> this magic happen?
Well, obviously you have to bump it once. Whether there's any utility
in saving you from having to bump twice is up for discussion, but
certainly you can.
MH> Also, how do I opt-out from this behavior (other than renaming my
MH> conditional)?
Not outside of redefining %dist. If an opt-out is important, the
conditional could be changed a bit:
%__bootstrap ~bootstrap
%dist %{?distprefix}.fc31%{?with_bootstrap:%{__bootstrap}}
Then you could %define _bootstrap %nil in your spec to avoid this.
[root@test-rawhide rpm]# rpm -D "with_bootstrap 1" -E %dist
.fc31~bootstrap
[root@test-rawhide rpm]# rpm -D "with_bootstrap 1" -D '__bootstrap %nil' -E %dist
.fc31
- J<
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
