Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864187
--- Comment #12 from Miro HronĨok <miro(a)hroncok.cz> ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Requires: %{name}
is insufficient here. You'll need a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
Well, I know I should do
this, but the think here is MCAD doesn't really need
the exact same version and release as OpenSCAD. In my case, you should be able
to update openSCAD or MCAD separately. I mean, you can simply run OpenSCAD
2012.11.01 and MCAD form 2012.05.10, it works.
Your package contains a *.desktop file, which needs to be installed
separately or validated:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_u... Will
do that.
Some warnings from rpmlint:
openscad.src:12: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile.
Macros
are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and
escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate.
The macros are there
uncommented, so they can be evaluated if someone wants to
recreate the source tarball.
The package versioning could cause some problems when upgrading it
once a
fully versioned tarball has been released. Please read the following:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages I will
certainly read that, just for the record, the date based versioning is
not something I've invented, if you build OpenSCAD, the version used is todays
date. I overwrite that with:
qmake-qt4 VERSION=%{version} PREFIX=%{_prefix}
Othervise the version (in program's About and such) would depend on the date of
building.
What would you suggest? This?
Version: 2011.12 (Latest stable)
Release: 1.20121031gitb04734cbf5%{?dist}
That would mean in program itself, the version would be noted as 2011.06 (a bit
old).
What about:
Version: 2012.10 (used version, without day)
Release: 0.31.1{?dist} (0 at the beginning, 31 as the day and .1 so I can bump
it)
That would mean in program itself, the version would be noted as 2012.10 (seems
OK).
If there is a tarball (e.g. 2012.10) released, I'll do:
Version: 2012.10
Release: 1{?dist}
This should work, right?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.