Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
commit e00f8293097f8331883f1df35f74be70fbb290b9
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Mon Oct 22 15:46:27 2012 +0200
Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
perl-Coro.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 50a855d..31589a5 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf '%{VERSION}')
+Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q libecb --qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs is not
allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the bundled
libecb version matches the system/non-bundled version, which really
doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest you simply remove the versioning
(or list the real bundled version some other way).
-- rex
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On 10/22/2012 05:34 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:14:25AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
commit e00f8293097f8331883f1df35f74be70fbb290b9
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Mon Oct 22 15:46:27 2012 +0200
Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
perl-Coro.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 50a855d..31589a5 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf '%{VERSION}')
+Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q libecb --qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs is not
allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the bundled
libecb version matches the system/non-bundled version, which really
doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest you simply remove the
versioning (or list the real bundled version some other way).
This is something like static library. Thus code gets frozen into the package
at build-time. So I concluded it's good idea to know which version of the
library the binary package incorporates.
However if you think this is bad idea I will remove it.
Yes, I do - I am insisting on the rpm calls to be removed.
Ralf
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:12:40 +0200
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 01:19:40PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 05:34 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:14:25AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf
'%{VERSION}') +Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q libecb
--qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs is
not allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the bundled
libecb version matches the system/non-bundled version, which
really doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest you simply remove the
versioning (or list the real bundled version some other way).
This is something like static library. Thus code gets frozen into
the package at build-time. So I concluded it's good idea to know
which version of the library the binary package incorporates.
However if you think this is bad idea I will remove it.
Yes, I do - I am insisting on the rpm calls to be removed.
Could you explain why calling rpm from spec file is bad idea?
The buildroot may have been populated by an rpm version outside a
chroot, with an incompatible version of libdb to the one in the chroot,
resulting in rpm within the chroot possibly being unable to read the
rpm database.
Paul.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:36:00PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:12:40 +0200
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 01:19:40PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 05:34 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:14:25AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf
'%{VERSION}') +Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q libecb
--qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs is
not allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the bundled
libecb version matches the system/non-bundled version, which
really doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest you simply remove the
versioning (or list the real bundled version some other way).
This is something like static library. Thus code gets frozen into
the package at build-time. So I concluded it's good idea to know
which version of the library the binary package incorporates.
However if you think this is bad idea I will remove it.
Yes, I do - I am insisting on the rpm calls to be removed.
Could you explain why calling rpm from spec file is bad idea?
The buildroot may have been populated by an rpm version outside a
chroot, with an incompatible version of libdb to the one in the chroot,
resulting in rpm within the chroot possibly being unable to read the
rpm database.
Do you think boostrapping RPM is relevant for an high level perl package?
I think it's quite unfortunate to disallow checking build system (especially
if the spec code can deal with failing rpm as in my example).
-- Petr
pgpZpnkp41NLg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 17:21:12 +0200
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:36:00PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:12:40 +0200
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 01:19:40PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 05:34 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:14:25AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf
'%{VERSION}') +Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q
libecb --qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs
is not allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the
bundled libecb version matches the system/non-bundled
version, which really doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest
you simply remove the versioning (or list the real bundled
version some other way).
This is something like static library. Thus code gets frozen
into the package at build-time. So I concluded it's good idea
to know which version of the library the binary package
incorporates.
However if you think this is bad idea I will remove it.
Yes, I do - I am insisting on the rpm calls to be removed.
Could you explain why calling rpm from spec file is bad idea?
The buildroot may have been populated by an rpm version outside a
chroot, with an incompatible version of libdb to the one in the
chroot, resulting in rpm within the chroot possibly being unable to
read the rpm database.
Do you think boostrapping RPM is relevant for an high level perl
package? I think it's quite unfortunate to disallow checking build
system (especially if the spec code can deal with failing rpm as in
my example).
It's nothing to do with bootstrapping rpm.
Builds are done using mock, which sets up the buildroot using the
buildsystem's version of rpm+libdb. This creates an RPM database in the
target chroot using the host's rpm.
Inside the buildroot, during the package build, the target's version of
rpm+libdb are used, which may be significantly older or newer than the
hosts's, depending on the target OS and the host OS. Hence calling rpm
within the spec file may fail because it may be unable to read the RPM
database, depending on how different the versions of rpm+libdb on the
host and target are.
Paul.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: [Fedora-packaging] [perl-Coro] Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:14:25AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
On 10/22/2012 10:06 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/22/2012 03:47 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
commit e00f8293097f8331883f1df35f74be70fbb290b9
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Mon Oct 22 15:46:27 2012 +0200
Work-aroung missing libecb package on build-triggering host
perl-Coro.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 50a855d..31589a5 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Requires: perl(EV) = 3
Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
-Provides: bundled(libecb) = %(rpm -q libecb --qf '%{VERSION}')
+Provides: bundled(libecb)%(rpm -q libecb --qf ' = %{VERSION}'
2/dev/null)
I could be wrong, but IIRC, calling rpm inside of rpm specs is not
allowed in Fedora.
Apart of this, what you are doing is rendering your built
non-deterministic - Another strictly forbidden item.
Agreed. What you're trying to say essentially is that the bundled
libecb version matches the system/non-bundled version, which really
doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest you simply remove the versioning
(or list the real bundled version some other way).
Also -- did you get a bundling exception for this? I don't see it listed on
the No Bundled Library page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Packages_granted_exceptions
-Toshio
pgpf6fBwb0e5V.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
