Disttags in mock?

[Michael_E_Brown at Dell.com]

I think dist tag would be good, myself. There are many positive reasons
for it, and I cannot think of a drawback.
--
Michael 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-buildsys-list-bounces at redhat.com 
> [mailto:fedora-buildsys-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of 
> Clark Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 12:23 PM
> To: Discussion of Fedora build system
> Subject: Re: Disttags in mock?
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 August 2006 13:11, Clark Williams wrote:
> >> Do we need to add a disttag to the mock specfile?
> >>
> >> My initial thought was no, since it's a noarch and pretty 
> much should
> >> run on any python >= 2.2. But, I'm not positive that we 
> shouldn't add
> >> a disttag; just a nagging feeling.  So I thought I'd throw 
> it out there...
> >
> > I added a disttag in the Extras CVS for this reason:
> >
> > When I want to release a new mock to extras, I'm usually 
> releasing the
> same
> > thing across all releases.  Because of this, the spec is going to be
> > identical, and the only thing that would change between the 
> releases is
> the
> > release number.  Since %{?dist} lets that be autogenerated, 
> the exact same
> > spec can be used across all the releases.  Makes it easy for me.
> 
> So, you'd like it if we added it to the upstream copy? I'm not against
> since there seems to be a use for it.
> 
> Clark
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFE41SCHyuj/+TTEp0RAsfWAKCMM5uv2DQD/TKrjuztc7TLR0KcdACfdFyX
> tH2Cz7M2l0bxYB5UJaifYus=
> =QHdy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --
> Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
> Fedora-buildsys-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
>