When building RPM's for CentOS, should I include ".el5.centos" in the Release field? I recently built (you might remember) pdftk-1.12-1.i386.rpm and have made it available for testing and inclusion in the Centos repos. However, when trying to find RPM's, I find it helpful if the package filename includes the distro and distro version number. I can easily produce "pdftk-1.12-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm" and other related files, but is this kosher? Or is the ".el5.centos" designation reserved for official releases, post-QA?
Just trying to do the right thing here. . .
Best,
--- Les Bell, RHCE, CISSP [http://www.lesbell.com.au] Tel: +61 2 9451 1144 FreeWorldDialup: 800909
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 11:51:29AM +1000, Les Bell wrote:
When building RPM's for CentOS, should I include ".el5.centos" in the Release field? I recently built (you might remember) pdftk-1.12-1.i386.rpm and have made it available for testing and inclusion in the Centos repos. However, when trying to find RPM's, I find it helpful if the package filename includes the distro and distro version number. I can easily produce "pdftk-1.12-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm" and other related files, but is this kosher? Or is the ".el5.centos" designation reserved for official releases, post-QA?
My suggestion would be .el5.lesbell.XXX.rpm, at it will both identify the distro and the source of the package.
Best Regards,
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 11:51:29AM +1000, Les Bell wrote:
When building RPM's for CentOS, should I include ".el5.centos" in the Release field? I recently built (you might remember) pdftk-1.12-1.i386.rpm and have made it available for testing and inclusion in the Centos repos. However, when trying to find RPM's, I find it helpful if the package filename includes the distro and distro version number. I can easily produce "pdftk-1.12-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm" and other related files, but is this kosher? Or is the ".el5.centos" designation reserved for official releases, post-QA?
My suggestion would be .el5.lesbell.XXX.rpm, at it will both identify the distro and the source of the package.
G'day Les, good to see you again, virtually speaking!
Note that the file name need not fully reflect the package name; the package could be el5.centos.i386.rpm and the file .el5.lesbell.i386.rpm,
I think this the file name: -14: _rpmfilename %{_build_name_fmt} and that inherits this (one line): -14: _build_name_fmt %%{ARCH}/%%{NAME}-%%{VERSION}-%%{RELEASE}.%%{ARCH}.rpm
It might be good to include _build_vendor in the name. I've not tested it but I think it won't affect dependency resolving.
-
John Summerfield -
Les Bell -
Rodrigo Barbosa