proper way to distinguish epel from fedora

Manuel Wolfshant wolfy at
Wed Nov 11 09:58:10 UTC 2009

Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 11/11/2009 05:13 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> On Tuesday 10 November 2009 08:15:58 pm BJ Dierkes wrote:
>>> On Nov 10, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Steve Traylen wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Manuel Wolfshant
>>>> <wolfy at> wrote:
>>>>> Farkas Levente wrote:
>>>>>> hi,
>>>>>> what's the proper way to distinguish epel from fedora in the spec
>>>>>> file?
>>>>>> i'd like to add
>>>>>> ExcludeArch:    ppc ppc64
>>>>>> on epel but not in case of fedora in a package (since there is no
>>>>>> java
>>>>>> on ppc on epel). but what's the current recommended way to do so?
>>>>>> unfortunately %{?rhel} is not defined even in rhel-5 so what else
>>>>>> can i
>>> Is there any problem with:
>>> %if %{el5}
>>> ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64
>>> %endif
>> yes nothing defines %{el5}  and you would get a failure on all targets
>> the correct way to handle it would be 
>> %if 0%{?rhel} > 1
>> ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64
>> %endif
> which is still not working for those who not install the extra packages
> buildsys-macros and of course won't work with rhel 6 where these exclude
> shouldn't have to defined.
> so until now no one send a general good solution:-(
The mock rpm distributed in epel contains something similar to


I do not want to sound harsh but if you refuse to use the macros which 
define the settings of the build infrastructure (either passing the info 
to mock or by defining  it in .rpmmacros (or any similar way)), how do 
you expect to find out what distro you are building for ?

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list