On 12/14/2015 10:21 AM, Martin Basti wrote: > > > On 14.12.2015 09:24, Martin Kosek wrote: >> On 12/14/2015 07:21 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote: >>> On 11.12.2015 19:01, Tomas Babej wrote: >>>> >>>> On 12/11/2015 09:36 AM, Martin Kosek wrote: >>>>> On 12/10/2015 05:09 PM, Martin Basti wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10.12.2015 15:49, Tomas Babej wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/10/2015 11:23 AM, Martin Basti wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10.12.2015 09:13, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: >>>>>>>>> On (09/12/15 19:22), Martin Basti wrote: >>>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5535 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Patch attached. >>>>>>>>> >From 8ef93485d61e8732166fb0c5b6c4559209740f3e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 >>>>>>>>> 2001 >>>>>>>>>> From: Martin Basti <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 18:53:35 +0100 >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] Fix version comparison >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Use RPM library to compare vendor versions of IPA for redhat >>>>>>>>>> platform >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5535 >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> freeipa.spec.in | 2 ++ >>>>>>>>>> ipaplatform/redhat/tasks.py | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/freeipa.spec.in b/freeipa.spec.in >>>>>>>>>> index >>>>>>>>>> 9f82b3695fb10c4db65cc31278364b3b34e26098..09feba7b8324f5e645da3e8010de86b6c3ee5ab9 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/freeipa.spec.in >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/freeipa.spec.in >>>>>>>>>> @@ -166,6 +166,8 @@ Requires: %{etc_systemd_dir} >>>>>>>>>> Requires: gzip >>>>>>>>>> Requires: python-gssapi >= 1.1.0 >>>>>>>>>> Requires: custodia >>>>>>>>>> +Requires: rpm-python >>>>>>>>>> +Requires: rpmdevtools >>>>>>>>> Could you explain why do you need the 2nd package? >>>>>>>>> It does not contains any python modules >>>>>>>>> and I cannot see usage of any binary in this patch >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LS >>>>>>>> Thanks for this catch, it is actually located in yum package, I >>>>>>>> rather >>>>>>>> copy stringToVersion function from there to IPA, to avoid >>>>>>>> dependency >>>>>>>> hell >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Updated patch attached. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looking good. The __cmp__ function, however, is not available in >>>>>>> Python >>>>>>> 3. As we will eventually support python3 in RHEL as well, maybe we >>>>>>> should make sure even platform-dependent parts are python3 >>>>>>> compatible? >>>>>>> For the future's sake. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tomas >>>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> python 3 compatible patch attached. >>>>> I wonder why we have to add so much code here and reimplement RPM >>>>> version checking if it is already provided by rpmdevtools: >>>>> >>>>> ~~~ >>>>> $ /usr/bin/rpmdev-vercmp ipa-4.2.0-15.el7 4.2.0-15.el7_2.3; echo $? >>>>> WARNING: hyphen in release1: 4.2.0-15.el7 >>>>> >>>>> rpmdev-vercmp <epoch1> <ver1> <release1> <epoch2> <ver2> <release2> >>>>> rpmdev-vercmp <EVR1> <EVR2> >>>>> rpmdev-vercmp # with no arguments, prompt >>>>> >>>>> Exit status is 0 if the EVR's are equal, 11 if EVR1 is newer, and >>>>> 12 if >>>>> EVR2 >>>>> is newer. Other exit statuses indicate problems. >>>>> >>>>> ipa-4.2.0-15.el7 < 4.2.0-15.el7_2.3 >>>>> 12 >>>>> ~~~ >>>>> >>>>> which could be directly called from __eq__ or __lt__, since we are in >>>>> platform specific code anyway already. >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>> Imho we should generally prefer reaching out to a Python library rather >>>> launching a subprocess to compare the versions, it's unnecessary >>>> overhead. >> I would not be too worried about miliseconds longer execution on a >> function >> called during RPM upgrade. >> >>>> That said, the main argument for the usage of rpm-python over >>>> rpmdevtools I see is that rpm-python is very likely to be present on >>>> the >>>> system (i.e. it is yum's own dependency), while rpmdevtools will not be >>>> present by default. >>>> >>>> From the standpoint of trying to minimize the size of freeipa >>>> installation (i.e recent wget -> curl migration), we should keep the >>>> spirit here and do not introduce a dependency for a collection of >>>> developer tools. >>>> >>>> /2 cents >>> +1, also a single function is hardly "much code". >> Ok then. If you all want to add yet another N-V-R parsing function in the >> FreeIPA code, I can live with it (with raised eyebrows though). > > Rebased patch attached.
I tested the patch, and it works fine - so conditional ACK from me for the current iteration of the patch, given developer consensus which was not reached yet. There's a split of opinions (external binary camp vs. copy&paste camp), so we need to decide if we both camps are OK with proceeding. Tomas -- Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code
