On 12/13/20 7:52 PM, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sun, 13 Dec 2020, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Also, since you might want to bump the release independently in EPEL (e.g. if
> we discover something was wrong in the way we have packaged this), I recommend
> doing:
>
> %global rhelrelease 10
> %global baserelease 1
> Release: %{rhelrelease}.%{baserelease}%{?dist}
> ...
> Requires: qpdf-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{rhelrelease}%{?dist}
>
> (Assuming qpdf has regular %{dist} and not some modularity artificial value.)
>
> Note that I've named the EPEL part of the release "baserelease", so
> rpmdev-bumpspec does the right thing.
If rhelrelease updates to 10.1 which will win ?
... and if we have already bumped baserelease to 2 ?
rhelrelease name
baserelease
10 2 qpdf-devel-10.2.epel.rpm
10.1 qpdf-devel-10.1.rhel.rpm
Which will win ?
Right. Can we use ^ in EL8 to separate the RHEL and EPEL parts?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok