Dne 10. 03. 19 v 23:17 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 6:13 PM Miro Hrončok
<mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi, I've just realized that %dist is defined to:
>
> %{?distprefix}.fc30%{?with_bootstrap:~bootstrap}
>
> That effectively means that using %bcond_without bootstrap, the dist is changed
> to .fc31~bootstrap.
This is the latest discussion about `%bcond_without bootstrap` as far as
I remember (of course except the ticket bellow).
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@lists.fedoraproje...
>
> Is this something that we actually want? E.g. I was quite surprised by the behavior.
>
> Reading
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/818
> gives me an impression that the packaging committee didn't really approve nor
> forbid this, so I'm looking for recommendation.
>
> When I bootstrap, should I manually bump the release number or let this magic
> happen?
Let the magic happen. Embrace it, and it will help you. 😁
+1
V.
>
>> Also, how do I opt-out from this behavior (other than renaming my conditional)?
>>
> I don't think you can unless you rename your conditional. This part
> was kinda added for Go things by Nicolas Mailhot. 🤷♂️
>
>
>