On 11/25/16 5:07 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >> On Nov 24, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Alexander Kanavin >> <alexander.kana...@linux.intel.com >> <mailto:alexander.kana...@linux.intel.com>> >> wrote: >> >> On 11/22/2016 06:10 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> >>> Again: I cannot do much more than suggest porting approaches unless I can >>> attempt reproducers. >>> Please try to expose your git repositories somehow, either publicly or >>> privately. >> >> Here it is: >> >> https://github.com/kanavin/libhif/commits/master >> > > Good. I will take a look at your libhif efforts. Note that libhif is only > one of several repositories that are going to be needed. > > FWIW, your invitation expired or is otherwise unusable (but at least > I can read your code, todo++). > > (aside) > Before we go too much further here: > > What is the intent of this collaboration?
The functional goal in this work is to stop using smart in the Yocto Project and switch to DNF. (We've found nothing else that is a reasonable alternative that is still under active development.) As far as the way things are done, I'll leave that between you, Alexander and anyone else interested. --Mark > You have chosen to fork libhif from > rpm-software-management/libhif > <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libhif> > rather than a fork (of a fork) from > https://github.com/rpm5/libhif > > That forces our coordination to be pulled from the only common > root at > rpm-software-management/libhif > <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libhif> > which almost certainly precludes any participation from me and rpm5.org > <http://rpm5.org> > for various reasons. > > Note that there are several other efforts attempting a dnf->…->rpm5 tool chain > that I > am aware of. Which is why I attempted RPM5 repositories to permit > collaboration, and > am perfectly willing to give write access to anyone who wishes. > > I am also perfectly willing to let someone other than rpm5.org > <http://rpm5.org> > administrate the mess if that > is what is desired. I do encourage all of you to collaborate early and work > forward from > working tools. There’s a fair amount of subtle work that will be needed imho. > > What is your intent: collaboration with rpm5.org <http://rpm5.org> or > collaboration with rpm-software-management? > >> I've fixed what I could by adding rpm5 includes, but the remaining build >> issues are all caused by actual API incompatibilities between 4 and 5. I can >> file them as separate github issues if you want. >> > > Um rpm5.org <http://rpm5.org> and rpm.org <http://rpm.org> have different > API’s, > and are most definitely different > implementations these days. Its not just include files, and more than libhif > is > going to > be needed to build a working dnf->…->rpm5 tool chain. > > I’ll take a look at your libhif this weekend. > > 73 de Jeff >> Alex >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org >> User Communication List rpm-users@rpm5.org >> <mailto:rpm-users@rpm5.org> > ______________________________________________________________________ RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org User Communication List rpm-users@rpm5.org
