Building and submitting updates for Fedora 20

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 10/06/2013 07:01 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/06/2013 04:06 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> fakeroot
> I don't understand this.
>
> With f20/rawhide as of yesterday, fakeroot in f20 and rawhide were 
> identical, because fakeroot was built before f20 was branched:
>
> ./development/rawhide/source/SRPMS/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.src.rpm
> ./development/rawhide/x86_64/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-libs-1.18.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm 
>
> ./development/rawhide/x86_64/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm 
>
> ./development/rawhide/i386/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-libs-1.18.4-1.fc20.i686.rpm 
>
> ./development/rawhide/i386/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.i686.rpm
> ./development/20/source/SRPMS/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.src.rpm
> ./development/20/x86_64/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-libs-1.18.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm 
>
> ./development/20/x86_64/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
> ./development/20/i386/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-libs-1.18.4-1.fc20.i686.rpm
> ./development/20/i386/os/Packages/f/fakeroot-1.18.4-1.fc20.i686.rpm
I now see ... the version in f19 was greater than that in f20+rawhide, 
for whatever reasons.
Actually, I wonder why AutoQA did not complain.

Ralf