> When we talk about configuration, what's meant by that? All macro
> definitions? Because there **only** seems to be an issue with
> `/etc/rpm/macros.image-language-conf` like things.
Yeah, apologies for the confusion. Even though a lot of RPM "configuration" is
done through macros, RPM does distinguish between *configuration* and *macros*,
both of which can be overridden with the `--rcfile` and `--macros` CLI options,
respectively.
What I meant was *macro* configuration, i.e. `--macros`. That takes a
colon-separated list of paths and defaults to this (line breaks are mine):
```
/usr/lib/rpm/macros:/usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.*:
/usr/lib/rpm/platform/%{_target}/macros:
/usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/*.attr:/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros:
/etc/rpm/macros.*:
/etc/rpm/macros:
/etc/rpm/%{_target}/macros:
~/.rpmmacros
```
That's why I said you'd need to supply all the desired files yourself when
using this CLI option as there's no way to just prepend/append paths to it.
> As you asked for ideas; I think there's a space for a low-level,
> distro-specific, rpm-sub-package that would install the distro-specific
> configuration. If there was such an RPM, Mock could just simply tell DNF to
> ignore the host's configuration at the beginning (split the preparation into
> two steps):
>
> ```
> $ rootdir=$(mktemp -d)
> dnf5 --installroot "$rootdir" install rpm-config --use-host-config
> dnf5 --installroot "$rootdir" install @buildsys-build
> ```
This is mixing two separate issues. The one originally discussed here is about
RPM respecting the config/macro files in the target root when called with
`--root`. Populating the root with the desired configuration is a then a
separate matter and one that would need to be discussed on `fedora-devel` or
similar channels.
Out of curiosity, though, does the second `dnf5` command *already* work the way
you want, or was that just your proposal for how it *could* work? If DNF
already works this way, that means it *does* perform some kind of RPM isolation
by itself (by calling RPM in a chroot/namespace) and thus adding an option like
`--use-installroot-config` to DNF should be fairly easy.
>
> The first transaction needs to be as small as possible. Small enough to let
> distro-maintainers cure the target distribution so the transaction **isn't
> affected** by the **host** configuration at all. The second transaction,
> since the config is already **in chroot**, can ignore the host configuration
> entirely.
>
> Seems like the set of packages in the first transaction in Fedora is
> currently pretty small:
>
> ```
> $ sudo dnf5 --installroot "$rootdir" install setup --use-host-config
> Updating and loading repositories:
> Repositories loaded.
> Package Arch Version Repository Size
> Installing:
> setup noarch 2.14.4-1.fc39 fedora 720.3 KiB
> Installing dependencies:
> fedora-gpg-keys noarch 39-1 fedora 123.2 KiB
> fedora-release noarch 39-30 fedora 0.0 B
> fedora-release-common noarch 39-30 fedora 17.7 KiB
> fedora-release-identity-basic noarch 39-30 fedora 666.0 B
> fedora-repos noarch 39-1 fedora 4.5 KiB
> filesystem x86_64 3.18-6.fc39 fedora 106.0 B
>
> Transaction Summary:
> Installing: 7 packages
>
> Total size of inbound packages is 1 MiB. Need to download 1 MiB.
> After this operation 867 KiB will be used (install 867 KiB, remove 0 B).
> Is this ok [y/N]:
> ```
>
> Not sure if one of those could be recycled for this purpose, instead of
> creating a new `rpm-config` package?
Again, while possibly a valid proposal, this is not the right venue for
discussing it, it needs to be brought up on the Fedora channels.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2623#issuecomment-1777409514
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2623/1777409...@github.com>_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
