Bug 2180791
| Summary: | Spec file versioning macros | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Cristian Le <fedora> |
| Component: | redhat-rpm-config | Assignee: | Florian Festi <ffesti> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 39 | CC: | ajax, carl, ffesti, fweimer, igor.raits, j, maxwell, mhroncok, ngompa13, nickc, pmatilai, sipoyare, torsava |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | Type: | Bug | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Cristian Le
2023-03-22 10:05:51 UTC
It's unclear to me whether you propose to implement this or you would like somebody else to do it. Reimplementing packaging.version in RPM macros might be a tad tricky. Well. We might need to discuss on how it can be designed, the name of the macros etc, and where should it be first implemented? Upstream, or here first. I think we can update here first to see what roadblocks we can encounter. I thought rpm was using python, but I see that's not the case, so we would have to manually implement these. Can we use regex, python scripts, C++ functions with dependencies in macros? If so I think I can implement 1 and 2 with some pointers to where to start. If you want to have it in redhat-rpm-config you can implement it in RPM macro syntax or Lua only. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 39 development cycle. Changing version to 39. |