I was thinking how to handle this today. I've only figured out *wrong*
solutions:
1. Modify `%__global_provides_exclude_from` to include
`%{_libdir}/python\d+\.\d+/.+\.so`.
This obviously has several problems: I cannot really do it from Python macros,
so the information would need to be kept in the general macros file. Also, if
we ever start providing something from those `.so` files, this would no longer
work. Also, it does not scale well.
2. Negate the entire ELF generator on the specific paths and provide alternate
ELF *requires* generator (without *provides*) for them. That seems like an
awful "copy paste stuff around" hack, ale not sure how to detect the need to do
this.
3. Extend RPM generators to be able to specify different
`%__NAME_provides_exclude_path`, `%__NAME_requires_exclude_path` instead of
general `%__NAME_exclude_path` and set `%__elf_provides_exclude_path` to
`%{_libdir}/python\d+\.\d+/.+\.so`. This should work but requires a lot of
work. Also obviously, if more things want to set
`%__elf_provides_exclude_path`, they would need to figure out how or have a
shared place to configure it.
4. Use `%{_rpmconfigdir}/elfdeps --provides
%{?__elf_provides_exclude_path:--exclude '%{__elf_provides_exclude_path}'}` in
`%__elf_provides` to simulate the above. However, the problem continues: If
both Perl and Python want to set `%__elf_provides_exclude_path` to "their"
path, they would need to have a shared place to configure it.
:/
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1227#issuecomment-684717757_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
