[Fedora-packaging] dist tag revisited

Dag Wieers dag at wieers.com
Mon Apr 4 02:39:50 UTC 2005

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:

> > Please ponder this implementation, and offer feedback.
> Since no one has offered any feedback, either no one cares, or what I've
> proposed is acceptable without comment.
> Please let me know which one is accurate. :)

I didn't reply because CVS and the internal buildsystem do not affect me. 
But if you want to know my opinion, I think the actual tagging should be 
done by the buildsystem and not by CVS, RPM or the packager.

I have said this before during the disttag discussions, so nothing new 

PS Could you clarify again what's inside %{dist}, %{distnum} and 
%{disttype} ? My buildsystem currently knows:

	dist	->	fc3
	disttag	->	1.fc3
	fc3	->	1

and the necessary dot is added by the buildsystem to disttag. Only dist 
and fc3 are used inside SPEC files. I think we have to rely on the macro 
language for granularity anyway (say you want a patch only to apply for 
fc2 and fc3, not fc1 and fc4).

Kind regards,
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list