Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
If an env-shebang is left alone then it's not right to filter /bin/env out of 
the dependencies because env is then needed for running too. The reason rpm 
doesn't generate dependencies for env-shebangs is that it can't be sure about 
the path. There was a ticket on the old rpm.org trac instance, probably dating 
back to last decade or so, discussed it with @scop there...  Okay, these days 
most many distros have the everything in /usr and there are only so many things 
that are used in shebang to begin with... might actually be time to revisit 
that part, but like that's a different topic.

The bigger reason for mangling env out of shebang lines is to make the 
interpreter of system utilities etc predictable and not subject to user 
environment. There is a point to that - I remember encountering and debugging 
some oddities that turned out to be caused by local Python installation in 
users path and cursing the waste of time. Down that path, you'd probably want 
to add some further restrictions to some interpreters, eg -E / -I / -s for 
Python etc.

And then there are cases where that flexibility is exactly what you *want*, 
which is why @remicollet is less than happy about this one (or rather, the new 
Fedora policy). So lets just accept there are valid reasons for both, and not 
make life unnecessarily hard for either case.



-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341629250___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFC: Replace hardcoded path with _libdir macro as done in pkgconfig.attr. (#346)

2017-11-02 Thread Yuri Dario 
In case above is not acceptable, this code can be used instead

%define py_prefix  %(echo `python -c "import sys; 
sys.stdout.write(sys.prefix)"`)

but I don't know if .attr files can handle above macro.


-- 
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/pull/346#issuecomment-341510183___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Problem with --signfiles for files that are hardlinked together (#333)

2017-11-02 Thread Stefan Berger 
@pmatilai Would it be possible to have these 4 patches applied to the latest 
rpm built for Fedora 26 and later?

-- 
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/333#issuecomment-341506488___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Update Polish plural forms (#347)

2017-11-02 Thread Piotr Drąg 
Transifex has wrong plural forms for Polish that they refuse to change.
Now that RPM ditched Transifex, we can fix it.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/347

-- Commit Summary --

  * Update Polish plural forms

-- File Changes --

M po/pl.po (5)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/347.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/347.diff

-- 
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/pull/347
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFC: Replace hardcoded path with _libdir macro as done in pkgconfig.attr. (#346)

2017-11-02 Thread Yuri Dario 
I have used the same macro from pkgconfig.attr.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/346

-- Commit Summary --

  * Replace hardcoded path with _libdir macro as done in pkgconfig.attr. Add

-- File Changes --

M fileattrs/python.attr (2)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/346.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/346.diff

-- 
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/pull/346
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread soig 
On 2 November 2017 at 15:24, Thierry Vignaud 
wrote:

>
> On 2 November 2017 at 00:05, Igor Gnatenko 
> wrote:
>
>> This might look too magic, but what it does in short:
>>
>>- Replace /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo.. One could argue on
>>this, so we could add some macro to disable this. In Fedora it is even
>>prohibited by guidelines now. This brp would help a lot!
>>- Drop shebang from non-executable files.. Having shebangs in
>>non-executable files doesn't make sense to me. If you think I'm wrong, I'm
>>ready to listen!
>>- If shebang is empty or doesn't exist, but file is executable -
>>remove executable bit, most likely it will not work anyway, only by luck
>>- Error out on shebangs like #!perl, this works only by luck
>>
>> cc @jasontibbitts  @Conan-Kudo
>> 
>>
>> —
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> ,
>> or mute the thread
>> 
>> .
>>
> ​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the
> auto requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo"
> There's other patches in order to emit requires on packages instead of
> file deps:
> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/
> SPECS/rpm.spec?revision=1173947&view=markup#l155
>
> ​The patch:
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SOURCES/script-env.diff?revision=870745&view=markup
​


-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341464346___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Remi Collet 
>>​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the 
>> auto requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo".

> This is interesting idea. Perhaps that could make @remicollet happier?

Yes, auto-dep on the default interpreter make sense.


-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341461429___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Vít Ondruch 
> ​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the auto 
> requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo".

This is interesting idea. Perhaps that could make @remicollet happier?

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341459945___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Test for ctermid() existence. (#345)

2017-11-02 Thread Yuri Dario 
Test for ctermid() in configure script instead of using OS define.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/345

-- Commit Summary --

  * Test for ctermid() existence.

-- File Changes --

M configure.ac (1)
M luaext/lposix.c (6)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/345.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/345.diff

-- 
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/pull/345
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] error: Failed to initialize NSS library (#340)

2017-11-02 Thread ニール・ゴンパ 
@zoujiaqing If you want to avoid that issue, you can try using beecrypt crypto 
backend instead of NSS.

-- 
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/340#issuecomment-341440317___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
> ​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the auto 
> requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo"

I think this is wrong approach. Because now try `ln -s /bin/falsh ~/bin/foo` 
and run your script... /bin/env is not acceptable for packages.

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341439087___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread ニール・ゴンパ 
@soig I personally don't think it's a good idea to eliminate file deps, as once 
you use package names, they get more distro-specific. For example, `perl-base` 
is a Mageia-only thing.

But that said, perhaps we want to support both (translating the dependency to 
the correct file dep from the interp dep generator and optionally mangling 
shebangs).

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341438632___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread soig 
On 2 November 2017 at 00:05, Igor Gnatenko  wrote:

> This might look too magic, but what it does in short:
>
>- Replace /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo.. One could argue on
>this, so we could add some macro to disable this. In Fedora it is even
>prohibited by guidelines now. This brp would help a lot!
>- Drop shebang from non-executable files.. Having shebangs in
>non-executable files doesn't make sense to me. If you think I'm wrong, I'm
>ready to listen!
>- If shebang is empty or doesn't exist, but file is executable -
>remove executable bit, most likely it will not work anyway, only by luck
>- Error out on shebangs like #!perl, this works only by luck
>
> cc @jasontibbitts  @Conan-Kudo
> 
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or mute the thread
> 
> .
>
​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the
auto requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo"
There's other patches in order to emit requires on packages instead of file
deps:
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SPECS/rpm.spec?revision=1173947&view=markup#l155


-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341437574___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] work with lua 5.3 without compat mode (#169)

2017-11-02 Thread ニール・ゴンパ 
@daurnimator Generally speaking, subtrees/submodules aren't really acceptable. 
And we don't usually vendor in libraries.

That said, maybe @pmatilai might make an exception for the Lua stuff, I don't 
know...

-- 
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/pull/169#issuecomment-341432247___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFC Merge RPM 4.13 OS/2 code changes (#260)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
I explained a whole pile of things that you could do to help your cause in  
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/260#issuecomment-339914006, 
how about starting with those?

-- 
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/pull/260#issuecomment-341428820___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
The v2 is here, I didn't add _exclude_from so far because of 1) templates are 
non-executable and we don't mangle such files anymore 2) it is not trivial to 
implement because it happens in shell which has a bit different semantics of 
regexps than RPM has

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341356755___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
Hmm, I seem to be misremembering: almost none of the existing ones either 
upstream or Fedora have disablers. So leave it out for now, I dont want to grow 
fifteen different styles of disabling that people then will be relying on.

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341351984___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
@pmatilai yeah, I remember reading #122, but I am probably not the one who 
wants to improve brp mechanism right now (e.g. implementing some classifiers as 
we have for dependency generators). And I will add enable_disable thing shortly.

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341351375___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add missing option to rpmspec manpage (#343)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
Thanks for the patch!

-- 
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/pull/343#issuecomment-341350461___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add missing option to rpmspec manpage (#343)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
Merged #343.

-- 
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/pull/343#event-1322505544___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
Haven't really looked / thought about it, just commenting on general level. For 
one, anything like this will require a way to disable because somebody *will* 
run into something unexpected. And that brings us back to PR #122 ... 

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341349963___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
@pmatilai thanks, I will remove it.. Should I keep some warning?

Do you have any opinion on other functionality included in brp script? Also 
what's your opinion on naming & idea of excluding files from mangling?

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341349161___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
> __shabangs_excluse_from

You are too drunk 🍷 🍺 🍻 🍸

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341348817___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Vít Ondruch 
> aha, this makes sense.. what do you think if there will be some macro which 
> would accept regex and not mangle those files? something like 
> __brp_mangle_shebangs_exclude_from

Yes, something like that would be useful ... what about __shabangs_excluse_from?

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341348091___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Panu Matilainen 
I would leave non-executable files alone. A shebang in a non-executable file 
can be simply considered to be a comment, it does no harm by existing.

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341347756___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
> For me it is generators. What would you do with file like this:
> 
> https://github.com/bundler/bundler/blob/master/lib/bundler/templates/Executable
> 
> Should it have executable bit or not? Should you remove the shebang?
> 
> There are some other examples in the directory:
> 
> https://github.com/bundler/bundler/tree/master/lib/bundler/templates

@voxik aha, this makes sense.. what do you think if there will be some macro 
which would accept regex and not mangle those files? something like 
`__brp_mangle_shebangs_exclude_from`

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341346612___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread Vít Ondruch 
>> Drop shebang from non-executable files.. Having shebangs in non-executable 
>> files doesn't make sense to me. If you think I'm wrong, I'm ready to listen!
>
> The main reason you might see this is for example scripts in examples or 
> things like that. I'd rather not mangle anything that's installed to 
> %_docdir...

For me it is generators. What would you do with file like this:

https://github.com/bundler/bundler/blob/master/lib/bundler/templates/Executable

Should it have executable bit or not? Should you remove the shebang?

There are some other examples in the directory:

https://github.com/bundler/bundler/tree/master/lib/bundler/templates

-- 
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/pull/344#issuecomment-341345725___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint