Naming convention - {?dist} in srpm file names?

[Eric Shubert]

I'm a noob to building rpmforge packages, but have some rpm building
experience. I've built and tested a build environment per quickstart.html.

I've built the clamav srpm for example, and it created
clamav-0.98-1.el6.src.rpm. I see in the repo:
clamav-0.98-1.rf.src.rpm.

I would like to follow the convention of having
<package>.<repo>.src.rpm for srpms, and
<package>.<repo>.<dist>.<arch>.rpm for binaries.
Is this not a good idea? It seems to be what rf is doing, and it makes
good sense to me.

I can't seem to control this the way I'd like. Am I missing some macros,
or are the resulting srpms being renamed outside of rpmbuild perhaps?

Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Eric Shubert
I can't seem to control this the way I'd like. Am I missing some
macros, or are the resulting srpms being renamed outside of rpmbuild
perhaps?

Hi,

No, they are produced by rpmbuild:

rpmbuild --rebuild --define 'dist .rf.el6'

Alternatively, %{dist} can be overridden in ~/.rpmmacros.

Mock also has a similar command line switch (and you can make a
permanent change in the configuration as well if you want):

mock -D 'dist .rf.el5'

Note that the whole repotag issue is basically a dead horse that people
keep kicking every once in a while, so it's highly advisable to search
various archives to get the full picture before you decide to give it
another go :-)

[Eric Shubert]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

Post by Eric Shubert
I can't seem to control this the way I'd like. Am I missing some
macros, or are the resulting srpms being renamed outside of rpmbuild
perhaps?

Hi,
rpmbuild --rebuild --define 'dist .rf.el6'
Alternatively, %{dist} can be overridden in ~/.rpmmacros.
Mock also has a similar command line switch (and you can make a
mock -D 'dist .rf.el5'
Note that the whole repotag issue is basically a dead horse that people
keep kicking every once in a while, so it's highly advisable to search
various archives to get the full picture before you decide to give it
another go :-)

Thanks Yuri. This is precisely what I was looking for.

So to get a different name for the srpms, I can simply do the source rpm
one way, then --define an 'extended' dist when --rebuild-ing the
binaries. I can live with that.

I've found historical bits and pieces regarding this, and I certainly
don't want to restart any flames. Better to leave a dead horse lie.

That being said, can you point me to a summary of what's considered
current best practice? I'd like to stay in step with others as much as
practical, and from what I've seen, I think the repoforge approach makes
the most sense to my situation.

Thanks again.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Eric Shubert
That being said, can you point me to a summary of what's considered
current best practice? I'd like to stay in step with others as much as
practical, and from what I've seen, I think the repoforge approach
makes the most sense to my situation.

Simply put, EPEL doesn't use repotags; RepoForge and few other
repositories (as far as I'm aware) still use them, but there is no
common strategy that is agreed upon out there, so everyone who uses
them, does so as he / she sees fit.

If you want a simple way to mark your own packages for internal use,
feel free to go for it if you like them, nobody will ever know :-)

If you are planning to provide a public repository, then all I can
advise is to get back to these old discussions and make up your mind.

[Christopher Meng]

rm doing doesn't mean it's the best, you should do what you prefer.