On Thu, 2015-06-18 at 06:38 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the link. I'm not sure I understood the reason for
> > having
> > an exception for fedora-{release,repos}*. The log says:
> >
> > 17:41:58 <tibbs|w> There's no reason for them to do so, since
> > their
> > version is tied to the distro version.
> >
> > Which is true, but why is that a reason to grant them an
> > exception?
> > Would it cause any problems it they contained a distro tag as
> > well?
> >
>
> Yes, because this is the package that provides the definition of
> the
> distro tag. It couldn't install itself.
Can you please explain that a bit more? Do you mean that the %{dist}
macro is not available before fedora-release is installed, and
therefore we couldn't _build_ the package? Because I don't understand
why the package should be not installable if it had .fcXX suffix.
Sorry, yes. I meant that the macro would not be available at build
-time. But as Ralf pointed out, I suppose we could hard-code the value
rather than use %{?dist}, which makes sense.
I'm not sure of any other specific rationale for not including the dist
in the Release: field. CCing Dennis Gilmore to see if he knows the
specifics.
In any case, if there was just a very small set of packages which
didn't use dist tag, but the information could be deduced some other
way (from the version field), I think that would still work for us in
Taskotron, we would hardcode the exceptions.