If I were doing it in Koji, I would have different build targets for the different dist tags, with the appropriate dist macro defined in each via a buildsys-macros package or similar. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > On 06/30/2014 08:00 AM, Bojtos Péter wrote: > > Thank you very much. I'm going to use the solution of Thomas for koji > > with the input from your script in git. > > > > So, the i686 kernel package is different that then main line one (so, > different than the one in git). Here is where the source RPM is for the > i686 kernel: > > > http://buildlogs.centos.org/c7.00.02/kernel/20140529190808/3.10.0-121.el7.i386/ > > That kernel has not been tested at all or de-branded. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Feladó: *"Johnny Hughes" <johnny at centos.org> > > *Címzett: *centos-devel at centos.org > > *Elküldött üzenetek: *Hétfő, 2014. Június 30. 14:02:31 > > *Tárgy: *Re: [CentOS-devel] el7_0 as dist tag (release mismatch in > > koji) > > > > On 06/30/2014 05:38 AM, Bojtos Péter wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > > > I'm trying to recompile RHEL packages to i686. Some RHEL source > > > packages has the dist tag el7_0 in it. How do you handle it, when > > > recompiling? Do you keep it by redefining the dist macro? > > > The spec file contains %{dist}, which comes from the > > > /etc/rpm/macros.dist. It contains el7 on RHEL installations. > > > > > > How should I avoid release mismatch in koji? > > > > We do not use koji currently at all. We have a small script that > > figures out the dist tag for each package on git.centos.org ... > > then we > > pass that into our mock command. It is called return_disttag.sh and > is > > in this tree: > > > > https://git.centos.org/tree/centos-git-common.git > > > > No idea how or if it will work with koji. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20140701/39e66842/attachment-0006.html>