18.06.2016 08:26, Dave Plater пишет:
On 18/06/2016 07:13, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
18.06.2016 08:10, Dave Plater пишет:
On 17/06/2016 23:45, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
I just read the link and at the bottom it states that both openSUSE:Leap:42.1 and 42.2 will be %suse_version 1315, is this intended? Can't Leap:42.2 at least be 1316 or better still 1335. > SLES has a different %suse_version for SP2. no , SLE12 ,SP1 and SP2 have suse_version = 1315 , and sles_version = 120000 , 120100 and 120200 + Leap has defined is_opensuse = 1
Exactly what my point is, you can distinguish between SLE12 SP1 and SP2 but you cannot distinguish between Leap:42.1 and 42.2 ie. %if %sles_version > 120100 identifies SP 2 only but there is no macro to identify Leap:42.2.
Now read message you responded to once more.
%sles_version == 120200 && %is_opensuse == 1
I'm confused, on my Leap:42.1 system rpm --eval %sles_version 0 %suse_version evaluates to 1315 %is_opensuse evaluates to 1, if Leap42.2 has a sles_version of 0 as well then there is no way to inform rpmbuild whether it is building for Leap:42.1 or 42.2 or are you stating that Leap:42.2 will have a sles_version as well as a suse_version? I apologize if you were agreeing with my first statement, there are many english languages in this world and it's difficult to understand them all.
That is a mess, really :(
First, this is not %sles_version, this is %sle_version. See
https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-07/msg00815.html Thanks for the heads up, I only came back on line with the mailing lists at the end of 2015, prior to that I had to depend on web gmail.
Second, this appears to be defined for OBS project only but missing in RPM macros. See e.g. https://build.opensuse.org/project/prjconf/openSUSE:Leap:42.1
Macros: %sle_version 120100 %suse_version 1315 %is_opensuse 1 :Macros
Finally there was discussion about adding %leap_version
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.suse.opensuse.packaging/14660 At least the ffmpeg problem was resolved, it's now only maintained in multimedia:libs and linked, along with other mission critical libraries
On 18/06/2016 09:19, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: like gstreamer. This has solved most of the old volatility of Packman packages and the mailing list is quiet. I think the shift in maintainers had something to do with Stephan not keeping his promise, sle_version works for me anyway.
And according to the last rpm changelog entry in Leap 42.1 it was also added ... except it is missing.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=985527
It is present in RPM in Leap 42.2 but I do not know if it has any meaningful value there:
sed -e 's/@suse_version@/%{?suse_version}%{!?suse_version:0}/' \ -e 's/@sles_version@/%{?sles_version}%{!?sles_version:0}/' \ -e 's/@ul_version@/%{?ul_version}%{!?ul_version:0}/' \ -e '/@is_opensuse@%{?is_opensuse:nomatch}/d' \ -e 's/@is_opensuse@/%{?is_opensuse}%{!?is_opensuse:0}/' \ -e '/@leap_version@%{?leap_version:nomatch}/d' \ -e 's/@leap_version@/%{?leap_version}%{!?leap_version:0}/' \ < %{SOURCE4} > suse_macros
So it sounds like catch 22 - we need valid %leap_version to set %leap_version. And where valid %leap_version comes from?
The path of least resistance is to replace leap_version with sle_version but sle_version doesn't make sense it should be leap_version at least is_opensuse gets set. I sense that there is some conflict behind the scenes in the land of enterprise suse. We'll wait and see what comes of your bug.
And RPM macros still have no trace of %sle_version ...
OMG ...
Thanks again, I have sle_version to distinguish 42.1 and 42.2, I just confirmed with osc meta prjconf openSUSE:Leap:42.2|grep sle_version. I can always define it locally myself like I do with BUILD_ORIG. My confusion came with sle_version and sles_version. Thanks Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org