Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Reset global macro state after each spec query/parse (#1067)
@pmatilai funny thing is that somebody recently (yesterday) mentioned this bug in the Russian Fedora telegram group and today you come up with the fix :) Can we also backport this to 4.14? -- 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/1067#issuecomment-585072855___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Reset global macro state after each spec query/parse (#1067)
Parsing a spec, even unsuccessfully, will affect the global macro state in any number of ways that may affect the following operations in unpredictable ways. Lacking any saner way to do this, reset the entire global macro state after each spec parse in rpmspec and spec query code (rpmbuild already does this) while maintaining possible cli-specified target and rcfile. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1067 -- Commit Summary -- * Reset global macro state after each spec query/parse -- File Changes -- M lib/query.c (7) M rpmspec.c (12) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1067.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1067.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/1067 ___ 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 parametric macro arguments available as native Lua table (#1063)
Oh, this would be so great. -- 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/1063#issuecomment-585008636___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)
Oh. There would be no way to buildrequire an extra. Is that what you mean? That's a problem. -- 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/1061#issuecomment-584926788___ 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: Syntax sugar for bconds with inherited defaults (#941)
My old suggestion was `%bcond `, with numeric "default" (zero
for false).
Aside from "inheritance", it might be used instead of
`%bcond_with`/`%bcond_without`. (Whenever I try to choose one, I have to stop
and think which one will give me the right default. I don't think I'm alone in
that.)
```
%bcond some_thing 0
%bcond some_inherited_thing %{with some_thing}
%bcond some_antiinherited_thing %{without some_thing}
```
--
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/941#issuecomment-584697721___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Use autodetect for _minimize_writes and _flush_io (#1066)
This is a take on #949 as described in https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/949#issuecomment-580354653 Original Patch is rebased to have access to the new rpmMacroIsDefined() function. Patches should probably be squashed before merging. Keeped them separate to make review easier. Resolves: #949 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1066 -- Commit Summary -- * Auto-enable optimizations for non-rotational disks on Linux * Use autodetect for _minimize_writes and _flush_io -- File Changes -- M lib/transaction.c (95) M macros.in (10) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1066.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1066.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/1066 ___ 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 a --salvagedb option to the rpmdb tool (#1042)
I'm not all that familiar with ndb internals: how is this different to the regular --rebuilddb just skipping any headers it finds invalid? Or to turn the question around: is there a reason why this could/should not be used on all --rebuilddb operations (on ndb)? -- 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/1042#issuecomment-584634417___ 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: please add a way to get the unexpanded content of a rpm variable (#582)
...and perhaps there should be that primitive to entirely suppress macro
expansion (as per the %{literal:...} suggestion in #1049, which simply expands
to its literal, unexpanded argument. But as literal is a macro type now, maybe
that should be called %{verbatim:...} instead. Dunno.
--
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/582#issuecomment-584596785___
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 %{body:...} built-in for retrieving the literal macro body (#1064)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ to perform useful operations. The current list is
%define ... define a macro
%undefine ... undefine a macro
%global ... define a macro whose body is available in global context
+ %{body:...} literal body of a macro
See the discussion in #582, the problem with %{verbatim:..} and other similar
variants is that the argument is ambiguous, whereas the term "body" is
unambiguous within rpm terminology, including the document in question. The
description could be better, no disagreement there.
--
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/1064#discussion_r377580861___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] CI on rawhide disabled temporarily (#1065)
Some infrastructure issue is causing CI builds on rawhide failing intermittently with "service temporary unavailable" -type errors which go away by persistently resubmitting the builds, but this is not productive use of anybody's time. So as of now, rawhide CI is disabled until further notice. -- 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/1065___ 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 %{body:...} built-in for retrieving the literal macro body (#1064)
voxik commented on this pull request.
> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ to perform useful operations. The current list is
%define ... define a macro
%undefine ... undefine a macro
%global ... define a macro whose body is available in global context
+ %{body:...} literal body of a macro
I am sorry, but from the macro name neither from its description I can tell
what it does. Isn't 'verbatim' more fitting name 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/1064#pullrequestreview-356582402___
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 %{body:...} built-in for retrieving the literal macro body (#1064)
Some open questions:
- Should the argument be expanded first, like doFoo() does? Using the literal
value has its pros but I guess its cons too.
- Is raising an error on undefined macro a reasonable thing to do? If not, what
should it do on undefined macros?
I was also tempted to add %{opts:...} which would return the option declaration
string (if any), but there's no direct way to distinguish between no value (ie
non-parametric macro) and empty string (parametric macro which doesn't take any
options) in the return value, so it'd need some other approach.
--
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/1064#issuecomment-584583853___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement %{body:...} built-in for retrieving the literal macro body (#1064)
Fixes: #582
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1064
-- Commit Summary --
* Implement %{body:...} built-in for retrieving the literal macro body
-- File Changes --
M doc/manual/macros (1)
M rpmio/macro.c (14)
M tests/rpmmacro.at (12)
-- Patch Links --
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1064.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1064.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/1064
___
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: please add a way to get the unexpanded content of a rpm variable (#582)
Good question, which I think settles the name as well: the argument is a macro
name, so it's not the opposite of %{expand:...} at all but a specific thing
that in rpm terminology is known as the macro body, so why make this any more
complicated... lets just call it %{body:...} and be done with 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/issues/582#issuecomment-584568890___
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 parametric macro arguments available as native Lua table (#1063)
RFC only for now: if we do this then we'd really want to export options natively to Lua too, and probably some other stuff 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/1063#issuecomment-584564977___ 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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
Merged #1053 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/1053#event-3025934733___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Make parametric macro arguments available as native Lua table (#1063)
Accessing macro arguments via rpm.expand(%1) etc is tedious, non-intuitive and subject to all sorts of expansion issues. Make the argument macros available as a native Lua table (named arg for consistency with -p lua scriptlet arguments) with their literal values - the arguments are already macro-expanded, so if further expansion is desired that is entirely up to the caller. rpmluav indexes unfortunately start at 1, so this leaves out the %0 macro from the arguments for sanity with the rest of the values. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1063 -- Commit Summary -- * Make parametric macro arguments available as native Lua table -- File Changes -- M rpmio/macro.c (32) M tests/rpmmacro.at (20) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1063.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1063.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/1063 ___ 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: please add a way to get the unexpanded content of a rpm variable (#582)
Is the argument a macro name or some generic string? I.e. is it
`%{body:_builddir}` which should then return ` %{_topdir}/BUILD`? Or is it
`%{noexpand:%_builddir}` which then should only do one level of expansion? I
find the latter a bit weird.
--
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/582#issuecomment-584551949___
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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -514,6 +514,22 @@ static ARGV_t runCmd(const char *cmd,
return output;
}
+static ARGV_t runCall(const char *cmd,
+const char *buildRoot, const char *fn)
+{
+
+ARGV_t output = NULL;
+char *fullcmd = rstrscat(NULL, "%{", cmd, " ", "%{?buildroot:buildroot/}",
fn, "}", NULL);
The latest version using literal resolves even the % 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/1053#discussion_r377526881___
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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
Updated to use rpmMacroIsParametric() as the API name, tweaks to commit message(s). -- 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/1053#issuecomment-584549360___ 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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
@pmatilai pushed 2 commits. c2177646458ef20c6d3cfeeddc0fa7ca34c0d50b Add APIs for testing whether a macro is defined and whether its parametric fc98504d59603014edffa53439b96c793ac11f29 Add support for macro-only dependency generators -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1053/files/d301eb41d0ac6cada357f281ff465f2f0b25b63a..fc98504d59603014edffa53439b96c793ac11f29 ___ 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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -1784,6 +1784,29 @@ rpmDefineMacro(rpmMacroContext mc, const char * macro,
> int level)
return rc;
}
+int rpmMacroIsDefined(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
+int defined = 0;
+if ((mc = rpmmctxAcquire(mc)) != NULL) {
+ if (findEntry(mc, n, 0, NULL))
+ defined = 1;
+ rpmmctxRelease(mc);
+}
+return defined;
+}
+
+int rpmMacroIsCallable(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
But okay, I'll update it to use rpmMacroIsParametric(), it's at least more in
line with our internal terminology than "callable".
--
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/1053#discussion_r377518331___
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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
mlschroe 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/1053#pullrequestreview-356505622___ 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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -1784,6 +1784,29 @@ rpmDefineMacro(rpmMacroContext mc, const char * macro,
> int level)
return rc;
}
+int rpmMacroIsDefined(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
+int defined = 0;
+if ((mc = rpmmctxAcquire(mc)) != NULL) {
+ if (findEntry(mc, n, 0, NULL))
+ defined = 1;
+ rpmmctxRelease(mc);
+}
+return defined;
+}
+
+int rpmMacroIsCallable(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
That seems to answer a different question (ie whether the macro was called with
parameters 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/1053#discussion_r377516660___
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 support for macro-only dependency generators (#1053)
mlschroe commented on this pull request.
> @@ -1784,6 +1784,29 @@ rpmDefineMacro(rpmMacroContext mc, const char * macro,
> int level)
return rc;
}
+int rpmMacroIsDefined(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
+int defined = 0;
+if ((mc = rpmmctxAcquire(mc)) != NULL) {
+ if (findEntry(mc, n, 0, NULL))
+ defined = 1;
+ rpmmctxRelease(mc);
+}
+return defined;
+}
+
+int rpmMacroIsCallable(rpmMacroContext mc, const char *n)
+{
Maybe `rpmMacroHasParameters()`?
--
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/1053#discussion_r377514959___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
