Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-04 Thread Axel Thimm
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 04:22:24PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > Okay, here's the first draft of spec changes to alter the kernel rpm > version and release fields to more closely match what the actual > upstream kernel base is. Its heavily commented at the moment to try to > explain what's going on.

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Jarod Wilson
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:01:16PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > >> The other crazy idea I had was to call 2.6.22-rc7 >> 2.6.22-0.rc7.git0.1.fc8. Making fedora_build auto-increment is probabl= y >> cleaner, though it'd be nice to also have it reset on a kernel major >> version rebase (either manu

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:32:51PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:26:06PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:56:45PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > > > > It's non-

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:26:06PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:56:45PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > > > It's non-obvious to me what %{?buildid} is, but it seems to > > > > > auto-incr

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Roland McGrath
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:56:45PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > > It's non-obvious to me what %{?buildid} is, but it seems to > > > > auto-increment. > > > > > > buildid is the "please set this to .me" one. > > >

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:01:16PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > The other crazy idea I had was to call 2.6.22-rc7 > 2.6.22-0.rc7.git0.1.fc8. Making fedora_build auto-increment is probably > cleaner, though it'd be nice to also have it reset on a kernel major > version rebase (either manually or

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Jarod Wilson
Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:47:18AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > > This is why Fedora adopted the pre-release versioning scheme that we > > did: > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages > > > > In the Fedora scheme, this

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:56:45PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > It's non-obvious to me what %{?buildid} is, but it seems to > > > auto-increment. > > > > buildid is the "please set this to .me" one. > > fedora_build i

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > It's non-obvious to me what %{?buildid} is, but it seems to > > auto-increment. > > buildid is the "please set this to .me" one. > fedora_build is the one to bump on commit. Can't %{fedora_build} be set based on the $Revision$

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Roland McGrath
> It's non-obvious to me what %{?buildid} is, but it seems to > auto-increment. buildid is the "please set this to .me" one. fedora_build is the one to bump on commit. ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redha

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:47:18AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > This is why Fedora adopted the pre-release versioning scheme that we > did: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages > > In the Fedora scheme, this would be > > 0.%{X}.%{alphatag

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Tom \"spot\" Callaway
On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 12:33 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:56:27AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > Roland McGrath wrote: > > >> What's Patch5? > > > > > > D'oh. Meant to nuke that. Inserted for testing purposes -- 'spectool > > > kernel-2.6.spe

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Dave Jones
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:56:27AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > Jarod Wilson wrote: > > Roland McGrath wrote: > >> What's Patch5? > > > > D'oh. Meant to nuke that. Inserted for testing purposes -- 'spectool > > kernel-2.6.spec -p 5 -d "somemacro value"' to verify expected N-V-R's > > being

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-03 Thread Jarod Wilson
Jarod Wilson wrote: > Roland McGrath wrote: >> What's Patch5? > > D'oh. Meant to nuke that. Inserted for testing purposes -- 'spectool > kernel-2.6.spec -p 5 -d "somemacro value"' to verify expected N-V-R's > being set properly. Disregard the -v2 patch, use this guy instead. :) > (or just drop the

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Jarod Wilson
Roland McGrath wrote: > What's Patch5? D'oh. Meant to nuke that. Inserted for testing purposes -- 'spectool kernel-2.6.spec -p 5 -d "somemacro value"' to verify expected N-V-R's being set properly. Disregard the -v2 patch, use this guy instead. :) (or just drop the Patch5 line out of the resulting

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Roland McGrath
What's Patch5? ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Jarod Wilson
Roland McGrath wrote: >> I presume you're referring to the likes of say kernel 2.6.21-gitX, which >> was post-2.6.21, but pre-2.6.22-rc1? Crap. Hadn't thought about that >> case. Okay, will have to do some further twiddling to cover that case... > > Yes, that's what I meant. Faking it as "rc0" mi

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Roland McGrath
> I presume you're referring to the likes of say kernel 2.6.21-gitX, which > was post-2.6.21, but pre-2.6.22-rc1? Crap. Hadn't thought about that > case. Okay, will have to do some further twiddling to cover that case... Yes, that's what I meant. Faking it as "rc0" might be the easiest thing to k

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Jarod Wilson
Roland McGrath wrote: > What about before the first -rcN tag? I presume you're referring to the likes of say kernel 2.6.21-gitX, which was post-2.6.21, but pre-2.6.22-rc1? Crap. Hadn't thought about that case. Okay, will have to do some further twiddling to cover that case... -- Jarod Wilson [EM

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Jarod Wilson
Roland McGrath wrote: > I think this is what will fix the kernel-vanilla-debuginfo-common problem. > > --- kernel-2.6.spec 2 Jul 2007 17:07:41 - 1.3245 > +++ kernel-2.6.spec 2 Jul 2007 20:28:13 - > @@ -1473,10 +1477,10 @@ BuildKernel %make_target %kernel_image k > %global __debu

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Roland McGrath
What about before the first -rcN tag? ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list

Re: Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Roland McGrath
I think this is what will fix the kernel-vanilla-debuginfo-common problem. --- kernel-2.6.spec 2 Jul 2007 17:07:41 - 1.3245 +++ kernel-2.6.spec 2 Jul 2007 20:28:13 - @@ -1473,10 +1477,10 @@ BuildKernel %make_target %kernel_image k %global __debug_package 1 %files debuginfo-

Kernel rpm versioning changes

2007-07-02 Thread Jarod Wilson
Okay, here's the first draft of spec changes to alter the kernel rpm version and release fields to more closely match what the actual upstream kernel base is. Its heavily commented at the moment to try to explain what's going on. The basic approach is this: 1st fedora build of 2.6.21.5: kernel-2.