On 11.06.2015 11:22, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
[you guys can stop CCing me, I'm subscribed :]
On Thursday 2015-06-11 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
Yes. Please make sure %suse_version is sensible for openSUSE 42 then (like using the value from SLE12). Not 4200 please ;)
This proposal _has_ to be rejected. It will break about every other package that uses %suse_version <=1320 / >1320.
What is worse is that due to absence of %sles_version since SLE12, we now have to special-case versions 1110 and 1315, as in, exemplary:
%if 0%{?suse_version} != 1110 && 0%{?suse_version} != 1315 BuildRequires: libgsasl-devel %endif ... %configure \ %if 0%{?suse_version} != 1110 && 0%{?suse_version} != 1315 --enable-gsasl %endif
Yes, something I'd like to avoid...
The problem is that packages using %suse_version > 1320 might actually be broken on :42 - SLE12's sources are different than what we had when this was done. So I'm afraid there is no good solution - suse_version must die ;( But knowing what strange uses we have for "1315" I'm afraid to touch it. So I would actually go with "%suse_version 1315" and "%opensuse_version 42" and increase suse_version in TW every month or so. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org