Montag, 16. Februar 2009

I really wish we could get rid of ".fcXY" as disttag in rawhide

I really wish we would get rid of using ".fcXY" as disttag in rawhide because it confuses way to many people when they find packages with tags like "fc7" on their fresh rawhide install... Simply using ".1" as disttag imho would be the best solution.
$ rpmdev-vercmp 1.2-3.1 1.2-3-fc10
0:1.2-3.1 is newer
Then packages that (for good reasons) don't get rebuild during one or two devel cycles don't have disttags from older fedora releases in their package names. But people didn't like it back when I proposed it some years ago. :-/ Hopefully someone sooner or later comes up with a better idea. ".fcn" for "Fedora Collections newest" maybe?
$ rpmdev-vercmp 1.2-3.fcn 1.2-3-fc10
0:1.2-3.fcn is newer


Michael hat gesagt…

.fedN ?

Too bad we couldn't just do "capital F".

Dare I disk it .fedora11 is extra typing but still nice and readable.

Michael hat gesagt…



AdamW hat gesagt…

We're not 'confused', it's a legitimate issue. It is generally a good idea to rebuild all code between releases, especially in an active distro like Fedora where all sorts of touchy things like gcc and glibc get touched from release to release. There are quite a lot of packages in Fedora 10 and Rawhide which are *not* simple lumps of noarch data - they're real code - which haven't been built since Fedora 7. That's not people getting confused, it's a problem to fix.

Thorsten Leemhuis hat gesagt…

> It is generally a good idea to rebuild all code between releases

Been there, discussed that (was a loooooong discussion), and the result was that FESCo didn't want it and voted against it.

Robert hat gesagt…

The real issue is, that we are abusing the release tag of RPM for years now. If we would use e.g. repotags from yum instead of our disttag as we currently do or if we would use a real disttag in RPM's header such as RPM5 is able to do (called epochdist there AFAIK), we wouldn't have that problem. Epochdist is similar to epoch RPM tag, but meant for the distribution. Whether to show or not to show can be handled by the configuration (ENVRA or ENVRAD).

Another thing is, which is independent of the issue mentioned above, that disttag is also used by package maintainers, which only take less care of their packages and rebuild them not for every release then. Such lots of noarch packages for Fedora 10 have been at .fc6 (especially man-pages). But we didn't want to enforce some kind of policy or guideline for rebuilds nor for skipping disttag as a must in such cases. Disttag is optional and multiple maintainers are not clever enough to either rebuild often enough or to remove the disttag from less active packages...