On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 03:47:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Kacper Kornet <drae...@pld-linux.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 06:38:10PM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet <drae...@pld-linux.org> wrote: > >>>>> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog, > >>>>> returns the commits ordered by commit date and not the AuthorDate > >>> Doing qsort(3) on RPMTAG_CHANGELOG* in rpmbuild isn't too hard, might be > >>> easier than trying to figure out how to trick up git sewage. > >> I wonder if RPM really needs to enforce the changelog order. Would it > >> really hurt if it just allowed building a package with such seemingly > >> unordered entries? Will anything break if we just disable the test? > > So we have two solutions: > > a) Switch to show committer dates in changelog. It should be possible to > > show these dates should be in chronological order. > > Drawback: for commits migrated from CVS this date is set to some > > value =~ time of cvs->git migration > > b) Patch rpm in PLD to remove enforcing of chronological order in > > changelog. The patch seems trivial. > > I would go for b). > c) qsort the 3 change log tags That can be done during changelog generation in builder. But I don't think it is a right solution. In my opinion changelog should reflect the topological history of development. > b) will introduce some incompatibilities: for starters, > there's functionality already implemented to truncate > change log's by number/oldest that will break if you > just go unordered. Do you mean the one build/parseChangelog.c:addChangelog? It depends how the breakage is defined. I have just checked and it behaves as expected in case of the non chronological changelog. If %_changelog_truncate macro is set to a date it ommits only older commits. All newer one are included independent of their position in changelog. And I think in PLD %_changelog_truncat macro should be set to a number, not a date. And there is always a possibility that was used in PLD in CVS. Generate the text of the whole changelog as a single entry in changelog from rpm point of view. That way rpm always see only one revision and does not complain. -- Kacper _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en