Re: REL_ENG versions produce different libraries?

[Nick Milas <nick@eurobjects.com>]

On 2/4/2012 11:41 ÏÎ, Marc Patermann wrote:

> That's what I do, too.
> ...
>
> I just change ol_patch to the next version, like 31, and set the rpm 
> version in my spec file to something like 000 to indicate this is a 
> pre version package. This works for me.

Thanks Marc and Buchan,

In the meantime, I tested it myself.

I downloaded the latest REL_ENG 
(http://www.openldap.org/devel/gitweb.cgi?p=openldap.git;a=snapshot;h=e911e7ad8b82b42a172967760fe6ec4333c57b71;sf=tgz); 
This produced openldap-e911e7a.tar.gz.

Then I changed ol_patch=X to ol_patch=30.1 (and repacked 
openldap-e911e7a.tar.gz as openldap-2.4.30.1.tgz).

Then I used (as usual) LTB-OpenLDAP src.rpm (v2.4.30) and changed in 
openldap-ltb.spec:

   %define real_version     2.4.30.1

I built successfully and installed (using rpm -Uvh, upgrading from the 
official release v2.4.30):

   openldap-ltb-2.4.30.1-1.x86_64.rpm
   openldap-ltb-contrib-overlays-2.4.30.1-1.x86_64.rpm
   openldap-ltb-debuginfo-2.4.30.1-1.x86_64.rpm

Everything worked OK.

(So, I can testify that the current REL_ENG works OK too - at least for 
my setup.)

In future upgrades (e.g. with some next REL_ENG, before final 2.4.31), I 
believe it would be fine (for yum/rpm) to similarly produce:

   openldap-ltb-2.4.30.2-1.x86_64.rpm

I guess I could have also used your approach, in which case I should 
change:

   ol_patch=31

and in openldap-ltb.spec:

   %define real_version     2.4.31
   %define release_version  1%{?dist}

and it would be OK too. In future upgrades, it would be enough to change:

   %define release_version  2%{?dist}

to allow for correct rpm/yum updates.

So, with any of the above methods, we would:

1. Avoid the problem of producing incompatible "-releng"-named libraries.
2. Be able to use rpm/yum for versioning and management.

Best regards,
Nick