Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add documentation for %getncpus macro (#707)
pmatilai commented on this pull request. > @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ to perform useful operations. The current list is %trace toggle print of debugging information before/after expansion %dump print the active (i.e. non-covered) macro table + %getncpus return the number of CPUs It's not a function, it doesn't really "return" anything, it expands to the number of CPUs, and more precisely CPUs *available to the current process*, which is not necessarily the same thing as total number of processors on the system. Fix those and its an obvious keeper. -- 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/707#pullrequestreview-238251416___ 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 documentation for %getncpus macro (#707)
Merged #707 into master. -- 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/707#event-2345667434___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Run binary package generation via thread pools (#226)
Closed #226. -- 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/226#event-2345662694___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Run binary package generation via thread pools (#226)
As #695 supersedes this I am closing this PRs. Thanks for your work and pushing this issue forwards. Those PRs clearly wouldn't be there if it wasn't for you! -- 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/226#issuecomment-492973864___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] debugedit: don't reorder sections (#565)
Closed #565. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/565#event-2345640600___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] debugedit: don't reorder sections (#565)
As per discussion in #423 , this appears to be a bug in libelf instead. Closing, but thanks for the help with testing and tracking it down. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/565#issuecomment-492971208___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add documentation for %getncpus macro (#707)
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/707 -- Commit Summary -- * Add documentation for %getncpus macro -- File Changes -- M doc/manual/macros (1) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/707.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/707.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/707 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Dynamic Build Dependencies (#593)
As the GH interface doesn't allow commenting on individual commits, I'll just make a general comment... In the "Pass rpmts object to rpmSpecBuild()" commit, there are two minor issues: - a stray empty line added before buildSpec() - a change to rpmbuild.c that belongs to the next commit (move to library, return 11 on missing buildrequires) Other than that, and the missing tests, it's looking quite okay now. -- 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/593#issuecomment-492961283___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Dynamic Build Dependencies (#593)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -273,20 +287,6 @@ static struct poptOption optionsTable[] = {
POPT_TABLEEND
};
-static int checkSpec(rpmts ts, rpmSpec spec)
-{
-int rc;
-rpmps ps = rpmSpecCheckDeps(ts, spec);
-
-if (ps) {
- rpmlog(RPMLOG_ERR, _("Failed build dependencies:\n"));
- rpmpsPrint(NULL, ps);
-}
-rc = (ps != NULL);
-rpmpsFree(ps);
-return rc;
-}
-
Works for me.
--
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/593#discussion_r284579742___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Dynamic Build Dependencies (#593)
pmatilai commented on this pull request. > * @param spec spec file control structure * @param buildArgsbuild arguments - * @return RPMRC_OK on success + * @return 0 on success, 1 on build error, + * RPMRC_MISSINGBUILDREQUIRES on missing build The return values are bit of a mishmash, some numeral and some RPMRC_ value that's not really an RPMRC afterall. Would be more consistent to return RPMRC_* constants for everything (but keep return type as int because of RPMRC_MISSINGBUILDREQUIRES). That, or just talk about numbers. -- 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/593#pullrequestreview-238228374___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Dynamic Build Dependencies (#593)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> +freeStringBuf(sb_stdout);
+free(output);
+return rc;
+}
+
+static rpmRC doCheckBuildRequires(rpmts ts, rpmSpec spec, int test)
+{
+rpmRC rc = RPMRC_OK;
+rpmps ps = rpmSpecCheckDeps(ts, spec);
+
+if (ps) {
+ rpmlog(RPMLOG_ERR, _("Failed build dependencies:\n"));
+ rpmpsPrint(NULL, ps);
+}
+if (ps != NULL)
+ rc = RPMRC_MISSINGBUILDREQUIRES;
This latter (ps != NULL) is redundant, just move the rc setting to the if (ps)
case above. Sorry for missing on the previous rounds.
--
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/593#pullrequestreview-238224478___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Dynamic Build Dependencies (#593)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> (what & ~RPMBUILD_RMSOURCE) |
(x ? 0 : (what & RPMBUILD_PACKAGESOURCE) {
goto exit;
}
}
} else {
int didBuild = (what & (RPMBUILD_PREP|RPMBUILD_BUILD|RPMBUILD_INSTALL));
+ int sourceOnly = ((what & RPMBUILD_PACKAGESOURCE) &&
+ !(what & (RPMBUILD_BUILD|RPMBUILD_INSTALL|RPMBUILD_PACKAGEBINARY)));
+
+ if (!spec->buildrequires && sourceOnly){
There's a missing space between ) and { (clearly, getting to the bottom of
things...)
--
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/593#pullrequestreview-238222866___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Warn if %else is after %else (#649)
Commit message is corrected. -- 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/649#issuecomment-492949023___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %buildarch does not reflect architecture of current %package declaration (#689)
There may be legit use-cases for knowing that arch, but the point is the macro created from the spec tag is not it. Hence it's better not define it at all. Ditto for several other tags for which macros are no longer created as of commit c62d91a56fa75fcabc3ab4b0d2f7822ddffbbeb5 -- 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/689#issuecomment-492929433___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
