On Tuesday, 23 June 2020 16.48.53 WEST Tom Callaway wrote:> There are a few of those, but not many.Hi Tom, I noticed that for example in R-assertthat you have used the bcond: %bcond_with check would not it be better to use bootstrap instead to take advantage of: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bootstrapping I am asking for curiosity since from now on we will need to do this dance once a year for the releases that we deem worth (I would expect that to be rawhide and the latest stable). Forgive me if the question does not make sense since I am still trying to make sense of this maze. :-) -- Jos? Ab?lio
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 11:36, Jos? Ab?lio Matos <jamatos at fc.up.pt> wrote:> > On Tuesday, 23 June 2020 16.48.53 WEST Tom Callaway wrote: > > There are a few of those, but not many. > > Hi Tom, > I noticed that for example in R-assertthat you have used the bcond: > > %bcond_with check > > would not it be better to use bootstrap instead to take advantage of: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bootstrapping > > I am asking for curiosity since from now on we will need to do this dance once > a year for the releases that we deem worth (I would expect that to be rawhide > and the latest stable). > > Forgive me if the question does not make sense since I am still trying to make > sense of this maze. :-)I used bcond locally and wrongly assumed that fedpkg build would support --with BCOND and --without BCOND. Instead, the way to activate it is to change to "%bcond_with check" and then revert to "%bcond_without check". The only difference with bootstrap is that "bootstrap" is recognized and a suffix ~bootstrap can be added automatically to the resulting build. So the question is whether we want that suffix or not. -- I?aki ?car
On Friday, 26 June 2020 10.47.13 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote:> I used bcond locally and wrongly assumed that fedpkg build would > support --with BCOND and --without BCOND. Instead, the way to activate > it is to change to "%bcond_with check" and then revert to > "%bcond_without check". The only difference with bootstrap is that > "bootstrap" is recognized and a suffix ~bootstrap can be added > automatically to the resulting build. So the question is whether we > want that suffix or not.AFAIU the issue is that the bootstrap scheme does not requires to bump the release because with the suffix (~) is considered lower while changing from "%bcond_with check" to "%bcond_without check" requires to bump the release. The issue is that koji does not allow 2 builds with the same nvr. Since we should ensure the upgrade path that also requires to bump the release number in rawhide before applying it on f32 (in this particular case). -- Jos? Ab?lio