Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
Yup, pushed. -- 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/1027#issuecomment-580621471___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
@ffesti pushed 1 commit. 44ca54c47a35b97245069b9e8d211f5ce7b169b4 Remove --sign from rpmbuild -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1027/files/dbbfdfdaae69c1941c44047b73b2a3acdbf5c9e3..44ca54c47a35b97245069b9e8d211f5ce7b169b4 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduce a new qualifier for meta dependencies (RhBug:1648721) (#1028)
Not possible. Traditionally all the generated dependencies have been strictly run-time dependencies and there has been no legit use-case, but if this meta-thing gets added, that situation changes somewhat. In the meanwhile I also recalled some of the open questions surrounding this: - any non-ordered dependency types in OrderWithRequires should optimally be errors or at least warnings because that just doesn't make any sense, currently the values are not sanity checked at all - what combinations of pre/post/blaa and meta are legitimate? -- 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/1028#issuecomment-580620335___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
How about this instead:
`rpmbuild alias --sign --eval "%{error:rpmbuild --sign is no longer supported.
Use the rpmsign command instead!}"`
...which gives you both error on stderr, and a non-zero exit code:
```
$ rpmbuild -bb --sign foo.spec; echo $?
error: rpmbuild --sign is no longer supported. Use the rpmsign command instead!
1
```
--
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/1027#issuecomment-580616610___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Alternatives handled by RPM (#993)
Hm, a good question to ask maybe is if we are fine with how the alternatives work in the context of the system as is though. Maybe a more clever approach would be to manage alternatives entirely through rpm cli and rpmdb, without having to deal with the existing implementations, which obviously there are many of those, openSUSE distros and Fedora distros do not share the same implementation which implementing this via macro magic sounds like it would bring out the weirdest differences in both. It does sound like it would be easier to implement too, if the %alternative didn't have to have effect on what happens in %package, %install, %post and %postun, and only exist in %files, file triggers + rpm internals. -- 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/993#issuecomment-580427849___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduce a new qualifier for meta dependencies (RhBug:1648721) (#1028)
I just realized, is it possible to generate deps with qualifiers by dependency generators? -- 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/1028#issuecomment-580362281___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Auto-enable optimizations for non-rotational disks on Linux (#949)
What about this: In setSSD() when enabling: Check if macro is already set. If so push the current value otherwise push "1". So after after rpmPopMacro things are back where they were before. Then we just have to remove the macros from the macros.in file. -- 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/949#issuecomment-580354653___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Alternatives handled by RPM (#993)
This is actually a nice use case to look how to make spec files more declarative and what road blocks are ahead. The main issue here is that there are all those moving pieces and rpm is not great in having them all in random order. Everything needs to go to the right place in the spec and so it is very difficult to expand this from a single place. Even more so if you what to have more than one %alternatives line. So this starts with there only being one %files section per sub package and only one of each scriptlets and build scripts. The %post and %postun scripts should actually done with file triggers but it's hard to pass data to them other than in the files themselves. May be we need to address them one by one. -- 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/993#issuecomment-580320572___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
I tried that but didn't get it to work. I'd also like to swallow the other cli arguments. Looks like the command is executed without a shell so what can be done easily is limited. -- 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/1027#issuecomment-580312213___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Print all build errors and do not stop after the first error (#1020)
Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.
> @@ -3107,7 +3107,7 @@ rpmRC processBinaryFiles(rpmSpec spec, rpmBuildPkgFlags
> pkgFlags,
int didInstall, int test)
{
Package pkg;
-rpmRC rc = RPMRC_OK;
+rpmRC res = RPMRC_OK;
Maybe we should just filter out `/usr/lib/debug/*` lines from the script?
--
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/1020#discussion_r373016378___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm2archive man page (#1016)
Closed #1016 via fb54f5c0a27b84036f5682809bdecf08e80244fe. -- 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/1016#event-2993766356___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
Merged #1021 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/1021#event-2993766278___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
Okay, 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/1021#issuecomment-580304893___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduce a new qualifier for meta dependencies (RhBug:1648721) (#1028)
Just for the record, I'm not super happy with the name "meta", but it's by far the least-worst of the options that I've come across so far. Names are hard. -- 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/1028#issuecomment-580298896___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement automatic conversion of the database (#1012)
Hmm, that's fair, and actually pretty much the reverse case of the problem I'm going to have now with openSUSE environments built on Fedora. -- 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/1012#issuecomment-580297616___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement automatic conversion of the database (#1012)
Yes it only converts in that case, but it'll still wreak havoc in the chroot case where converting might render the chroot unusable from the inside with no warning. That's why I think there always needs to be an explicit request to perform conversion - there's simply no way rpm can know when it's desireable or not. -- 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/1012#issuecomment-580296993___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %generate_buildrequires should have a page on rpm.org (#1029)
Although the new cli for rpmbuild is described in the rpmbuild man page the feature is big enough that it deserves a article of its own. -- 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/1029___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
I'd be a lot less nervous about adding this (in particular the reverse case) if we prioritized strong dependencies over weak ones in ordering... -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580294310___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
Yeah, the thing is that I can easily see how the ability to affect somebody elses install order can be a powerful thing - also in its ability to break things by introducing stronger dependency loops from the outside. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580292579___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
Another interesting combination would be the new meta qualifier from #1028 to allow keeping the weak deps out of the dependency mess. This would obviously also be useful for reverse dependencies. May be even more than for forward ones. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580288838___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
@pmatilai My thought there is that if scriptlets do progressive enhancement (that is, they check for things and use if they're available), then this would be useful functionality for that. We used to have a number of those in Fedora, but these days I see them more with third party packages (such as the ones I do for `$DAYJOB`). -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580286282___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement automatic conversion of the database (#1012)
@pmatilai My reading of this is that it only attempts a conversion if it can't _write_ in the target database format. So it seems to be narrowly scoped enough to not cause hell, while avoiding the nastiness of trying to do a database conversion on the fly. -- 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/1012#issuecomment-580282117___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. -- 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/1027#pullrequestreview-350867595___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
I definitely can see use-cases for this with some of the stuff I do for `$DAYJOB`. For example, if an interpreter has multiple valid implementations, being able to use `Suggests(*)` would allow the solver to be told which one to prefer for that. Generally speaking, if we allow strong dependencies with qualifiers, we probably should allow the weak dependencies too. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580280536___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduce a new qualifier for meta dependencies (RhBug:1648721) (#1028)
Add a new meta qualifier for expressing dependencies that are not concrete install- or run-time dependencies, and thus should not take part in install ordering. There are quite a lot of such dependencies in the wild, for example versioned sub-package cross-dependencies are typically of this type and a common source of unnecessary dependency loops. Another common case are dependencies of meta-packages. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1028 -- Commit Summary -- * Introduce a new qualifier for meta dependencies (RhBug:1648721) -- File Changes -- M build/parsePreamble.c (1) M lib/formats.c (2) M lib/rpmds.h (6) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1028.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1028.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/1028 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove --sign from rpmbuild (#1027)
When splitting rpmsign from rpmbuild this command line parameter was kept as an popt alias. But this limits what other parameter can be passed to the rpmsign command in a difficult to understand way. In the end everyone is better off using the rpmsign command directly. Issue a error message stating the parameter is no longer supported Resolves: #153 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1027 -- Commit Summary -- * Remove --sign from rpmbuild -- File Changes -- M rpmpopt.in (7) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1027.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1027.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/1027 ___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
pmatilai commented on this pull request. > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +.TH "RPM-AUDIT" "8" "28 Jan 2020" "Red Hat, Inc." +.SH NAME +rpm-plugin-audit \- Audit plugin for the RPM Package Manager + +.SH Description + +The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the audit log - like packages installed or removed. + +There are currently no options with which the plugin can be configured. + +It can be disabled permanantly by commenting out the +\fI%__transaction_audit\fR macro in main macros file +(typically located at \fI/usr/lib/rpm/macros\fR) or otherwise change Oh, I didn't really mean putting that table literally in the manual, just presenting it here in that format seemed to 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/1021#discussion_r372959920___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
ffesti commented on this pull request.
> +
+The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the syslog -
like transactions run and packages installed or removed.
+
+.SH Configuration
+
+There are currently no options with which the plugin can be configured.
+
+It can be disabled by either setting the \fI%__transaction_syslog\fR macro
+to \fI%{nil}\fR in some \fI/etc/rpm/macros.*\fR file or undefine it
+on the command line with \fB--undefine=__transaction_syslog\fR.
+
+It is also possible to disable all plugins temporarily my passing
+\fB--noplugins\fR to \fBrpm\fR.
+
+Another option is to remove the plugin from the system if it is
+packaged in its own sub package.
It's done 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/1021#discussion_r372938281___
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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
ffesti commented on this pull request. > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +.TH "RPM-AUDIT" "8" "28 Jan 2020" "Red Hat, Inc." +.SH NAME +rpm-plugin-audit \- Audit plugin for the RPM Package Manager + +.SH Description + +The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the audit log - like packages installed or removed. + +There are currently no options with which the plugin can be configured. + +It can be disabled permanantly by commenting out the +\fI%__transaction_audit\fR macro in main macros file +(typically located at \fI/usr/lib/rpm/macros\fR) or otherwise change Ok, formatting this was as complicated as I expected... -- 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/1021#discussion_r372937888___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
@ffesti pushed 1 commit. dd465de59dc340b58d2f522ad0b90d764c740898 Add man pages for plugins -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1021/files/0cfc79acfbd122c831177214ac92e2fcc8871afe..dd465de59dc340b58d2f522ad0b90d764c740898 ___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
ffesti commented on this pull request. > +.TH "RPM-SELINUX" "8" "14 Apr 2016" "Red Hat, Inc." +.SH NAME +rpm-plugin-selinux \- SELinux plugin for the RPM Package Manager + +.SH Description + +The plugin sets SELinux contexts for installed files and executed +scriptlets. It needs SELinux to be enabled to work but will work in +both enforcing and permissive mode. + +.SH Configuration + +There are currently no options for this plugin in particular. See +.BR rpm-plugins (8) +on how to control plugins in general. + Nah, this is just me being brain dead. Restored. -- 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/1021#discussion_r372912147___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Make 'rpm -V' more resistent against rpmdb manipulations (#196)
Just FWIW, #811 is also a step into this direction. -- 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/196#issuecomment-580175256___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
@pmatilai I am just saying that while this is not something what 99.9% people would use (reverse weak deps with qualifiers), there might be a use-case created by Fedora policies. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580174596___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] License of find-lang.sh is ambiguous around modification (#595)
> Hmm? Commit > [9ba41db](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/9ba41db49f2f74465de1fa35e4b6127bc34c4106) > is from @vuntz, whose ack we seem to also be missing here. And then there's > commit > [e9c13c6](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/e9c13c6565cf4782d1f73255ee9144dd9bd2aca7) > from @pavlinamv . No problem on my side for relicensing to MIT. -- 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/595#issuecomment-580174531___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Make 'rpm -V' more resistent against rpmdb manipulations (#196)
There is not much one can do on a compromised system as even the tools themselves may be compromised. But there is support for Integrity Measurement Architecture (IMA) and the Linux Extended Verification Module (EVM) in rpm since 4.13 which puts signatures to the security.ima extended file attribute of all (non config) files. Together with storing the keys in the TPM and checking the kernel signature at boot time this much better than anything RPM can hope to achieve with software only. Closing. -- 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/196#issuecomment-580170332___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Make 'rpm -V' more resistent against rpmdb manipulations (#196)
Closed #196. -- 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/196#event-2992624343___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] License of find-lang.sh is ambiguous around modification (#595)
Hmm? Commit 9ba41db is from @vuntz, whose ack we seem to also be missing here. And then there's commit e9c13c6565cf4782d1f73255ee9144dd9bd2aca7 from @pavlinamv . -- 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/595#issuecomment-580169170___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] License of python-rpm-generators (#471)
Please just license those two files as GPLv2+. There is not point in having those scripts as LGPL. It's not like anyone is going to link to them. -- 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/471#issuecomment-580164865___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] License of python-rpm-generators (#471)
Closed #471. -- 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/471#event-2992582824___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Generate dependency on setuptools if entrypoints are used (#555)
Looks like it. Closing. -- 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/555#issuecomment-580160357___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Generate dependency on setuptools if entrypoints are used (#555)
Closed #555. -- 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/555#event-2992545639___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] License of find-lang.sh is ambiguous around modification (#595)
Ok, looks like this has stalled. @spotrh can you please post the email from Mr Estes? I'll take care of the PR and everything else after that. You might want to have a quick look at 9ba41db49f2f74465de1fa35e4b6127bc34c4106 to check if we need permission from @pavlinamv but I guess that's not enough to be copy rightable. -- 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/595#issuecomment-580158965___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
Well, Fedora policies are irrelevant here. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580151794___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
pmatilai commented on this pull request. > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +.TH "RPM-AUDIT" "8" "28 Jan 2020" "Red Hat, Inc." +.SH NAME +rpm-plugin-audit \- Audit plugin for the RPM Package Manager + +.SH Description + +The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the audit log - like packages installed or removed. + +There are currently no options with which the plugin can be configured. + +It can be disabled permanantly by commenting out the +\fI%__transaction_audit\fR macro in main macros file +(typically located at \fI/usr/lib/rpm/macros\fR) or otherwise change Oh, if you want to elaborate on the actual messages, here's a brief descriptions of the fields: | Field | Possible values | Description | ||---|| | op| install/update/remove | package operation | | sw| | name-version-release.arch of the package| | key_enforce | 0/1 | are signatures being enforced | | gpg_res | 0/1 | result of signature check (0 == ok, 1 == fail) | root_dir | | Root directory of the operation, normally "/" | sw_type | rpm | package format | -- 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/1021#discussion_r372825258___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Allow qualifiers like pre, post, preun, ... for weak dependencies, too (#1022)
It might help in absolutely same cases where you would use forward weak deps, but you simply can't do that by policy like Fedora has. Imagine checking for presence of ffmpeg in post, but you are not allowed to use Recommends (post): ffmpeg by Fedora policy. However, even this is stupid, in this case you can do this from ffmpeg side with Supplements(post): original-package. -- 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/1022#issuecomment-580148919___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
Other than those 1-2 items, looks good to me 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/1021#issuecomment-580145770___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
pmatilai commented on this pull request. > +.TH "RPM-SELINUX" "8" "14 Apr 2016" "Red Hat, Inc." +.SH NAME +rpm-plugin-selinux \- SELinux plugin for the RPM Package Manager + +.SH Description + +The plugin sets SELinux contexts for installed files and executed +scriptlets. It needs SELinux to be enabled to work but will work in +both enforcing and permissive mode. + +.SH Configuration + +There are currently no options for this plugin in particular. See +.BR rpm-plugins (8) +on how to control plugins in general. + Hmm, there was a mention of --nocontexts here, which seemed quite appropriate to me. Any particular reason for removing it or did it just get flushed with the generic change? -- 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/1021#pullrequestreview-350653198___ 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 man pages for rpm2archive and various plugins (#1021)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> +
+The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the syslog -
like transactions run and packages installed or removed.
+
+.SH Configuration
+
+There are currently no options with which the plugin can be configured.
+
+It can be disabled by either setting the \fI%__transaction_syslog\fR macro
+to \fI%{nil}\fR in some \fI/etc/rpm/macros.*\fR file or undefine it
+on the command line with \fB--undefine=__transaction_syslog\fR.
+
+It is also possible to disable all plugins temporarily my passing
+\fB--noplugins\fR to \fBrpm\fR.
+
+Another option is to remove the plugin from the system if it is
+packaged in its own sub package.
Seems this got forgotten when converting these to "see rpm-plugins(8)"
--
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/1021#pullrequestreview-350651301___
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 macros for default flags of file extractors. (#557)
Hmm, okay. If @ascherer no longer cares and I don't seem to get this done despite promising to do so... maybe we'll just close this then. Thanks for your work on this @ascherer anyway! @dmnks , if you want to have a go at the generic progname_flags thing, feel free but open a new PR for that if/when you have something for 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/pull/557#issuecomment-580140593___ 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 macros for default flags of file extractors. (#557)
Closed #557. -- 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/557#event-2992398932___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
