Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
Yo, On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 11:28:06PM -0800, Brian J. Murrell wrote: from the quill of Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] on scroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the correct behavior. I am not sure what is the problem here then? No problem really. Just that if you build MDK rpms with the stock rpm, it may not come out the same as with MDK's rpm. Just confirming the behaviour difference. Well Ok but I am still not too sure what you mean ... if you mean RH doens't support multiple versions for one src rpm - binary rpm then that's not true c.f. tcltk package. -- Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] §õªø· http://www.mandrakesoft.com/~snailtalk ftp://devel.mandrakesoft.com/pub/people/snailtalk "Seven days in a honeymoon makes one whole week."
Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
from the quill of Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] on scroll
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well Ok but I am still not too sure what you mean ... if you mean RH
doens't
support multiple versions for one src rpm - binary rpm then that's
not true
c.f. tcltk package.
A, but they do not use the %{version} macro anywhere. Upon further
inspection, neither does the MDK SPECfile that I was looking at. So
thre moral of the story is you can have multiple Version: tags, just DO
NOT expect to use %{version} in that SPECfile.
b.
--
Brian J. Murrell
Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
from the quill of Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] on scroll
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes.
But this only works with Mandrake's rpm. I guess I should go look at
the patches applied by the rpm specfile in the Mandrake distro.
Well if you are not too sure you can always use:
%define foover 1.0
%define barver 1.1
Version: %{foover}
[...]
%package bar
[...]
Version: %{barver}
True but if anything from package references %{version} it will get 1.1.
On the stock rpm that is. It seems to work OK on Mandrake's RPM
though.
b.
--
Brian J. Murrell
Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
Yo,
But this only works with Mandrake's rpm. I guess I should go look at
the patches applied by the rpm specfile in the Mandrake distro.
Well if you are not too sure you can always use:
%define foover 1.0
%define barver 1.1
Version: %{foover}
[...]
%package bar
[...]
Version: %{barver}
True but if anything from package references %{version} it will get 1.1.
On the stock rpm that is. It seems to work OK on Mandrake's RPM
though.
This is the correct behavior. I am not sure what is the problem here then?
--
Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
§õªø·
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/~snailtalk
ftp://devel.mandrakesoft.com/pub/people/snailtalk
"Seven days in a honeymoon makes one whole week."
Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
from the quill of Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] on scroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the correct behavior. I am not sure what is the problem here then? No problem really. Just that if you build MDK rpms with the stock rpm, it may not come out the same as with MDK's rpm. Just confirming the behaviour difference. b. -- Brian J. Murrell
Re: [Cooker] Multiple Version: tags in SPECfiles??
Yo,
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 04:00:50PM -0800, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
I have noticed, in the kernel SPECfile for instance, you can define
different sub-packages with different Version: tags. This seems to work
Yes.
only with the Mandrake supplied rpm however. A stock rpm changes the
%{version} macro according to the most recent Version: tag.
Are my observations correct or is there something I am missing?
Well if you are not too sure you can always use:
%define foover 1.0
%define barver 1.1
Version: %{foover}
[...]
%package bar
[...]
Version: %{barver}
--
Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
§õªø·
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/~snailtalk
ftp://devel.mandrakesoft.com/pub/people/snailtalk
"Seven days in a honeymoon makes one whole week."
