Hi Stephane, > -----Original Message----- > From: Stéphane Desneux [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 9:32 PM > To: Chanho Park; [email protected] > Cc: 'Yury Usishchev' > Subject: Re: [Dev] Tizen RPM macros now defines %suse_version : good or > not ? > > On 07/08/2014 13:05, Chanho Park wrote: > > Hi Stephane, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stephane > >> Desneux > >> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 7:09 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [Dev] Tizen RPM macros now defines %suse_version : good or > not ? > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Recently, Yury Usishchev added a patch over the rpm package: > >> https://review.tizen.org/gerrit/#/c/25292/ > >> > >> This patch adds the %suse_version definition to rpm-tizen_macros. > >> > >> This broke the build for some packages that use %suse_version in > >> Tizen:Common and I opened a bug for that: > >> https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/TC-1474 > >> > >> I see two cases: > >> - a package must be built into Tizen and into openSuse. Example: mic, > >> kickstarter, ... and maybe other tools that have a single spec file > for > >> multiple distros (including tizen) > > > > We didn't catch there is some packages to build by openSUSE. > > > >> - a package is specific to Tizen but the spec file was initially > copied > >> from openSUSE (and may contain some tests on %suse_version which > should > >> be removed). > >> > >> From what Yury told me, the base reason to add %suse_version was: > >> "%suse_version macro is checked by 'build' script and enables > cumulate > >> install. It is believed to be a bit faster and reduces number of > errors > >> with msm.so." So it was added for good reasons. But maybe it's not > the > >> proper way to fix the base problem. > >> > >> > >> So my final question is simple: is it desirable to > define %suse_version > >> into Tizen ? > >> > >> > >> IMO, the answer should be *no* and we should rollback to the previous > >> state for all impacted packages (rpm, icecream, mic, kickstarter, > >> python-yaml, ...). But this also means that the special ops done by > >> 'build' when it detects the %suse_version macro should be done also > when > >> %tizen_version is defined. Is it something that the Tools team can > >> investigate ? > > > > I've made a patch to fix this problem. Instead of defining the > suse_version, > > I set the DO_CUMULATIVE varables always TRUE because we'll always use > newer > > suse version than 1220. > > If the patch can resolve the issue, I'll revert all of my patches. > > > > https://review.tizen.org/gerrit/#/c/25635/ > > LGTM ! > > As soon as it's merged, please resubmit the previous group of packages > in one single group (gbs submit -T <tag>) for: > - rpm (to be fixed to remove %suse_version in macros) > - build > > IIRC, the following packages should also be resubmitted in the same > group with the previously accepted commits: > - icecream > - mic > - kickstarter > - python-yaml > - zypper > > I'm not sure if this list is complete, but it's not far from the > submissions you did to fix the build errors.
I reverted all of the commits and requested them with group tag. Group tag : submit/tizen/20140807.124405 Packages: python-pygments mic python-yaml kickstarter zipper build Best Regards, Chanho Park _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
