From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Ledford Subject: Re: [RFCv2 00/15] RFCv2: Consolidated userspace RDMA library repo Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:12:37 -0400 Message-ID: <33e0e621-e027-abe7-d287-bc551c1961b2@redhat.com> References: <01dc01d1fcb0$a1dd3ed0$e597bc70$@opengridcomputing.com> <20160822214352.GB11695@obsidianresearch.com> <20160823185441.GA1233@obsidianresearch.com> <20160825173916.GC20612@obsidianresearch.com> <20160825195246.GI1916@redhat.com> <20160825201306.GA5421@obsidianresearch.com> <20160826154206.GK1916@redhat.com> <20160826222725.GA8553@obsidianresearch.com> <5421f173-384d-faef-0eab-518db6dad0e5@redhat.com> <20160830012738.GH6803@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jfdBS4WnlTUXELjf8plU9hDrB5indRAR1" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160830012738.GH6803-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jarod Wilson Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Steve Wise , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, 'Devesh Sharma' , 'Hal Rosenstock' , 'Mike Marciniszyn' , 'Moni Shoua' , 'Sean Hefty' , 'Tatyana Nikolova' , 'Vladimir Sokolovsky' , 'Yishai Hadas' List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jfdBS4WnlTUXELjf8plU9hDrB5indRAR1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="KG9190KsgbNnbQQ04CrI4sevEBkMBbLH8"; protected-headers="v1" From: Doug Ledford To: Jarod Wilson Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Steve Wise , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, 'Devesh Sharma' , 'Hal Rosenstock' , 'Mike Marciniszyn' , 'Moni Shoua' , 'Sean Hefty' , 'Tatyana Nikolova' , 'Vladimir Sokolovsky' , 'Yishai Hadas' Message-ID: <33e0e621-e027-abe7-d287-bc551c1961b2-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Subject: Re: [RFCv2 00/15] RFCv2: Consolidated userspace RDMA library repo References: <01dc01d1fcb0$a1dd3ed0$e597bc70$@opengridcomputing.com> <20160822214352.GB11695-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> <20160823185441.GA1233-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> <20160825173916.GC20612-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> <20160825195246.GI1916-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> <20160825201306.GA5421-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> <20160826154206.GK1916-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> <20160826222725.GA8553-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> <5421f173-384d-faef-0eab-518db6dad0e5-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> <20160830012738.GH6803-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20160830012738.GH6803-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> --KG9190KsgbNnbQQ04CrI4sevEBkMBbLH8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 8/29/2016 9:27 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:00:22PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: >> On 8/26/2016 6:27 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > ... >>> 3) Version numbers. What version numbers do we give to the sub >>> packages? I guess this is very distro specific. >> >> You can not give different versions to sub-packages. Or, allow me to = be >> more precise: You can't use the Version: tag on sub-packages, it rese= ts >> the version of the entire package overall when you do. The last >> Version: tag in the spec file ends up being the version applied to >> everything. This impacts the %{version} macro usage in the spec file.= >> The only way to put versions on sub-packages is to make it part of the= >> sub-package's name. >=20 > I'm not so sure about that. Check out our linux-firmware package and > sub-packages. There are several firmwares with their own Version: tags = in > their sub-package definitions, and the base linux-firmware package stil= l > comes out of there with the intended original Version: from the top of = the > spec. I suppose %{version} maybe does get stomped on, Correct. The %{version} macro gets stomped on, so all of the typical guidelines about spec files that tell you to use %{version} in various places have to be ignored. > but the solution > I've seen used is to simply set an extra %global and use that where you= > would have used %{version} in the spec. Yes, that works. But it's an ugly hack and should be taken as a clue that you are using rpm in a way that it doesn't want to be used ;-) > That said, I tend to agree with what Doug is saying... If this is all o= ne > big tree, then it's one big release, and should have one big consistent= > version number, most likely. Otherwise, it's a massive headache and a b= it > of a mess to maintain, package-wise, like he said. >=20 --=20 Doug Ledford GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD --KG9190KsgbNnbQQ04CrI4sevEBkMBbLH8-- --jfdBS4WnlTUXELjf8plU9hDrB5indRAR1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXyG+VAAoJELgmozMOVy/dG74P+wUXzX0o5fT3GSHbY0gTMeIj RCYGiSHU9hutN4vUGRcwVqa+jspcS8oaHtQZPhmj663JsVPVbJd34V6+EZty24pu Lga50wq+HeXiHXGKmlFA3vLOeilnWYe/SJxC9hAf8YtVV+jijlH2B2wEEv1PoSop Ttr37OTs8k4KikRdje1+Yflo36qXnrF2jSKbV/pYC09yQQNOlzc2hrTWkLwKzvZx s5OVcIpel8AbGCkz2fywLvm2hUuOHwD9xWGvf/pN7kj2H5ouHR8i0UkXSB8En51e Lz83Vvw4FhV9VoS185DwL3WNhGTwRGVKGl4VGpXR9psvPpIaGs86/QfGY9gWPdwQ ea6cgVBO2x9pcEvyacebk5u7i4hVKiqVw/yC++zydfirMtcJixRxQauuvAI7CUmJ DuZKntUMzvgz67+CORwrhVVvQa3OsqtSIdnxB+d4WT2aXBWZ1t+7LeJsdUlxkmcu k6csde3Cf0fkU8Cx1tgWDvJ6bHROTItK8vgpyqMhILA+I12xPR/Ggj1VYE8x7hP+ N7C9zrOCMMSDDDbPeQKxMkGF9jsgclbPeufMSRO/rjHTSFNUfJYxAtq/Dqb9e4Xb 4dCLFyoSJJKDPtVbAOAnlR9Try1Nurco0PcZilbNFYPvF7neQxhou8+TS3WEJEPM mV82Yq3w93fEhKsvJmLr =gPB6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jfdBS4WnlTUXELjf8plU9hDrB5indRAR1-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html