From Mandriva Community Wiki

[edit] Comments

JBJ

<jbj> morning
<NED260_WORK> jbj, hi!
--- tru_tru is now known as tru_tru_afk
<jbj> NED260_WORK: g'morning.
<NED260_WORK> jbj: over at Mandrakesoft some sort of disttag related discussion is igniting...
<NED260_WORK> jbj, I thought you would be interested
<jbj> Disttag: is in rpm-4.4 which is almost released, like next 3 days. bits on rpm-4_4 cvs branch, packages at ftp://jbj.org/pub/rpm-4.4.
<jbj> everything else depend on vendor and packager aceeptance, not me and rpm.
<jbj> Personally, I think Disttag: will never ever work, but that's just me, Disttag: is in rpm-4.4.
<NED260_WORK> jbj: thanks for the explanation!
<NED260_WORK> jbj, if you're interested you can read over some of the thoughts of some Mandrake packagers here: http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/DistroSpecificReleaseTag
<NED260_WORK> jbj, the disttag implementatio hasn't been discussed there (yet)
<jbj> what's wrong with Disttag: is that the value is inside, not associated with, a package. anyone who rebuilds without changing will damage the reliability of the data, anyone who simply copies a package into a new collection will damage the reliability of the data. This has happened before, the Distribution: tag in packages was intended for the same Disttag: purpose, and the values are known to be too unreliable to use, and too hard to maintain.
<jbj> note "within a package", there are other was to attach an attribute to a package in a conventional and reliable fashion whose value can be changed without rebuilding the package.

-- AngeloNaselli - 23 Jan 2005: I chose to use the opposite view, i mean i always build packages for cooker and after that updating for distro, i know normal users don't but the warning message advice him. Anyway my macro is:

%{?''with''official: %define release 0.%(echo $[%rel-1].%{subrel}.%{distversion}%{distsuffix})}
%{?!''with''official: %{error:%(echo -e "\n\n\nYou are building an unofficial package, please see \nhttp://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/DistroSpecificReleaseTag\nif you think this is incorrect\n\nUse --with official option to build an official package\n\n\n ")}%(sleep 4)}

What do you think about it?

-- BuchanMilne - 24 Jan 2005 Not using the distribution-specific tag by default defeats the whole point of the excercise. Eventually, we should be able to get to the point where a urpmi-like tool can automatically build packages from cooker SRPMs, and it should not break anything by default. Surely, it's less effort for the cluster maintainer to add the macro to 6 machines (or, failing that for 40 maintainers to add the macro to their .rpmmacros on the cluster) than every user who has ever rebuilt an rpm to do it?

-- AngeloNaselli - 01 Feb 2005 I agree with that, anyway waiting for an unique point of view I'm using the --without unstable to make official packages, so the default is for cooker yet. That to avoid other cluster packagers who sometimes rebuild my rpms having problems. Another way to make %withunstable --with-unstable available into ~/.rpmmacros could be to leave the maintainers adding it. Think about other mocros you added when you customized your home-dir on cluster, I followed the rules in rpm howto, contrib howto and whatelse so just add this macro to that lists and every new user will put it in.