Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] error: parse error in expression: %{__isa_bits} == 64 (#1133)
No. `0%{__isa_bits} == 64` should be the proper syntax.
--
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/1133#issuecomment-603014131___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] First iteration of a 4.14.3 update release (#1078)
This pull request **fixes 1 alert** when merging d697e9203b7e9a137febe2a29aaf99adb4ed84c4 into 4a9440006398646583f0d9ae1837dad2875013aa - [view on LGTM.com](https://lgtm.com/projects/g/rpm-software-management/rpm/rev/pr-78507ce5040c3795798c34f8dfbb5587f97dc9b5) **fixed alerts:** * 1 for FIXME comment -- 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/1078#issuecomment-602922600___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] First iteration of a 4.14.3 update release (#1078)
This pull request **fixes 1 alert** when merging 56de48c00912cb5eec276721a1ee87b8d1d97975 into 4a9440006398646583f0d9ae1837dad2875013aa - [view on LGTM.com](https://lgtm.com/projects/g/rpm-software-management/rpm/rev/pr-5e7a927b23b9fa2362cbb597d2048ad589fdd4d6) **fixed alerts:** * 1 for FIXME comment -- 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/1078#issuecomment-602905486___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] First iteration of a 4.14.3 update release (#1078)
This pull request **fixes 1 alert** when merging f82ee9df748944a31128de97c7b4927a7c938734 into 4a9440006398646583f0d9ae1837dad2875013aa - [view on LGTM.com](https://lgtm.com/projects/g/rpm-software-management/rpm/rev/pr-616778c78f8fc978fd3bd0c93222f4df6c8b68f9) **fixed alerts:** * 1 for FIXME comment -- 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/1078#issuecomment-602900758___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] First iteration of a 4.14.3 update release (#1078)
@ffesti pushed 3 commits. 96f75d58e5c8855af4583a69a1fa67b3bdbbacbc Use python2 as the python binary name 0c5940ef1859ea9bbb32781825d8771a2bba2d02 Unbreak testsuite from unversioned obsoletes warnings 966ac68a35fb1d69a7684904844525b8e49bcae9 Move version to 4.14.3-rc1 -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1078/files/59ce0dba6a3d68e5bf6f0168ba17cc8b7c8999e1..966ac68a35fb1d69a7684904844525b8e49bcae9 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] error: parse error in expression: %{__isa_bits} == 64 (#1133)
Compiling
[fixedptc](https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fixedptc/blob/master/f/fixedptc.spec#_57)
package failed in koji as follows:
```
error: parse error in expression: %{__isa_bits} == 64
error: ^
error: /builddir/build/SPECS/fixedptc.spec:57: bad %if condition:
%{__isa_bits} == 64
```
Full log is available
[here](https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42724782).
However, I didn't observe similar problem while building in copr
[here](https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dwrobel/fixedptc/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01311349-fixedptc/).
Was there any recent change in the syntax or in the parser?
--
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/1133___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Migrate away from Zanata (#1131)
Of course, but most of the job you can do yourself. @m-blaha : can you please apply the same of what you did for dnf? I'm unsure you need any help from me now that you did it for four components. could you please discuss together the full list of project that can be translated in rpm-software-management group? ;) All of them are welcome, there is no limit. -- 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/1131#issuecomment-602868387___ 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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)
Anyway, what about something like `%_verify_fetched_source_checksums` macro with values `0/1/2` where ``` 0: do not check source checksums even if present 1: check source checksums if present as `#()` url suffix by invoking `sum` command from coreutils to do the check 2: check source checksums and return false when some fetched source does not have a checksum attached ``` I imagine the verification would only apply to files that were fetched by rpmbuild. Those that were already present before the build started wouldn't be checked with assumption that user gave to rpmbuild valid sources. What do you think? -- 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/463#issuecomment-602809707___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Migrate away from Zanata (#1131)
@Jibec Can you help us move to the new Weblate based setup? -- 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/1131#issuecomment-602759191___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)
@pmatilai I think you meant to do `9:0:1`, not `10:0:1`. -- 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/commit/d21065956aef6cdd3ab83303b4fb71039c17221b#commitcomment-37997701___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)
I think it actually does. -- 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/commit/d21065956aef6cdd3ab83303b4fb71039c17221b#commitcomment-37997532___ 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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)
> One problem with the `sources` file is that it is distro specific -- Fedora > uses `sources`, OpenMandriva uses a similar file (though with slightly > different syntax) called `.abf.yml`, probably other distributions have yet > other workarounds. > > Another problem is that it's not the spec file -- I don't think we want to > end up with a mess similar to what dpkg has in those debian directories. I think it is distro-specific because it is tight down to particular distribution-git that some higher-level tools work with (fedpkg, centpkg, rpkg, ...), i.e. where the packages are stored. But the SourceX: in rpm spec file typically does not reference a tarball in that particular dist-git but it instead references sources from upstream (at least in Fedora/CentOS and for OpenMandriva that seems to be true as well). But that's not from where the tarballs are downloaded when they are going to be built. -- 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/463#issuecomment-602752407___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)
Doesn't this bump the soname anyway? -- 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/commit/d21065956aef6cdd3ab83303b4fb71039c17221b#commitcomment-37997467___ 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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)
One problem with the `sources` file is that it is distro specific -- Fedora uses `sources`, OpenMandriva uses a similar file (though with slightly different syntax) called `.abf.yml`, probably other distributions have yet other workarounds. Another problem is that it's not the spec file -- I don't think we want to end up with a mess similar to what dpkg has in those debian directories. -- 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/463#issuecomment-602719980___ 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/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)
Rebased. Probably ought to have done that regardless. :) -- 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/1015#issuecomment-602657283___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] RPM 4.16.0 alpha released!
On 3/23/20 3:22 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
So soon you say? Well, its almost a year since 4.15 alpha and annual
release schedule isn't *that* fast. More like trying to get back on
track with this release stuff after some erratic years.
Anyway, here goes. The two major themes here are: preparing to finally
kick Berkeley DB out, and (conditional) macro expressions. If you ever
thought %{?foo:bar} is too limited, this one is for you.
So this is what I get for trying to cut a release on Monday: the
originally linked rpm-4.15.90-git14970 snapshot has a buggy rpm.pc file
which prevents using it for linking. Since an important aspect of alpha
testing is testing other software... duh.
Just pushed a new snapshot (rpm-4.15.90-git14971) to fix that and
updated the download links + hashes, but if you were eager enough to
have grabbed the first snapshot then you'll want to update.
Highlights include:
- Powerful macro and %if expressions including ternary operator
- New sqlite and read-only BDB backends, NDB promoted to stable
- Automatic SSD detection and optimization on Linux
Seems I also forgotten some highlights as well:
- Support for dependency generation with parametric macros
- Support for dependency generation based on MIME types
The details and download info still at
https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.16.0
Apologies for the confusion,
- Panu -
- Panu -
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Nuke leftover LMDB reference in rpm.pc.in (#1132)
Merged #1132 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/1132#event-3155510758___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Nuke leftover LMDB reference in rpm.pc.in (#1132)
Shouldve been in commit 7de982ac0957c42f228b43685d9f486e55eac331 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1132 -- Commit Summary -- * Nuke leftover LMDB reference in rpm.pc.in -- File Changes -- M rpm.pc.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1132.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1132.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/1132 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] RPM 4.16.0 alpha released!
So soon you say? Well, its almost a year since 4.15 alpha and annual
release schedule isn't *that* fast. More like trying to get back on
track with this release stuff after some erratic years.
Anyway, here goes. The two major themes here are: preparing to finally
kick Berkeley DB out, and (conditional) macro expressions. If you ever
thought %{?foo:bar} is too limited, this one is for you.
Highlights include:
- Powerful macro and %if expressions including ternary operator
- New sqlite and read-only BDB backends, NDB promoted to stable
- Automatic SSD detection and optimization on Linux
Further details & download info at:
https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.16.0
On behalf of the rpm-team, with special thanks to Michael Schroeder for
all the database and expression work!
- Panu -
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Prepare for rpm 4.16.0 alpha (#1130)
Merged #1130 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/1130#event-3155069039___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Migrate away from Zanata (#1131)
Zanata is apparently in the process of being shut down. Migrate away to some other translation platform. For added bonus, get rid of that annoying po/ noise in our git tree. -- 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/1131___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Prepare for rpm 4.16.0 alpha (#1130)
Remember to update translations from Zanata, split to separate commits while at 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/1130#issuecomment-602565404___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Prepare for rpm 4.16.0 alpha (#1130)
Update libtool version info for 4.16.0 - only added APIs, none removed. Regenerate translations. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1130 -- Commit Summary -- * Prepare for rpm 4.16.0 alpha -- File Changes -- M po/ar.po (935) M po/br.po (942) M po/ca.po (978) M po/cmn.po (972) M po/cs.po (960) M po/da.po (959) M po/de.po (976) M po/el.po (928) M po/eo.po (0) M po/es.po (0) M po/fi.po (0) M po/fr.po (0) M po/id.po (0) M po/is.po (0) M po/it.po (0) M po/ja.po (0) M po/ko.po (0) M po/ms.po (0) M po/nb.po (0) M po/nl.po (0) M po/pl.po (0) M po/pt.po (0) M po/pt_BR.po (0) M po/rpm.pot (0) M po/ru.po (0) M po/sk.po (0) M po/sl.po (0) M po/sr.po (0) M po/s...@latin.po (0) M po/sv.po (0) M po/te.po (0) M po/tr.po (0) M po/uk.po (0) M po/vi.po (0) M po/zh_CN.po (0) M po/zh_TW.po (0) M rpm.am (0) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1130.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1130.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/1130 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Deprecate Berkeley DB backend and beecrypt support (#1129)
Merged #1129 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/1129#event-3154847669___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Restore flagless variants of rpmExprBool() and rpmExprStr() for ABI c… (#1128)
Merged #1128 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/1128#event-3154846695___ 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/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)
It's failing in CI due to the following warning/error: > macro.c: In function 'doFoo': macro.c:1211:2: error: 'sprintf' argument 3 may overlap destination object 'buf' [-Werror=restrict] 1211 | sprintf(b, "file%s.file", buf); | ^~ macro.c:1074:11: note: destination object referenced by 'restrict'-qualified argument 1 was declared here 1074 | char *buf = NULL; | ^~~ This was fixed in the codebase quite some time ago, please rebase the tree to get past that (obviously unrelated) issue. -- 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/1015#issuecomment-602537580___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Deprecate Berkeley DB backend and beecrypt support (#1129)
Both components are dead upstream for about seven years, deprecate them for later removal, now that we have alternatives. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1129 -- Commit Summary -- * Remove support for obsolete --with-beecrypt configure switch * Deprecate beecrypt support * Deprecate Berkeley DB database backend -- File Changes -- M configure.ac (12) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1129.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1129.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/1129 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Restore flagless variants of rpmExprBool() and rpmExprStr() for ABI c… (#1128)
…ompat Commit cb4e5e755aa77b132569249c1ac6d87b9c2c76ba added flags arguments to rpmExprBool() and rpmExprStr(), but unfortunately rpm 4.15 sailed with flagless versions them. Its extremely unlikely that anything out there is actually using these, but then you never really know. Rpm soname bumps are so inconvenient that we really do not want to do that just for these two, so preserve binary compatibility and restore flagless variants of both, adjust internal code to use flagged versions always. If only we had symbol versioning, sigh. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1128 -- Commit Summary -- * Restore flagless variants of rpmExprBool() and rpmExprStr() for ABI compat -- File Changes -- M build/parseSpec.c (2) M rpmio/expression.c (14) M rpmio/macro.c (4) M rpmio/rpmmacro.h (17) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1128.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1128.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/1128 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: introduce symbol versioning to librpm* (finally) (#1127)
Symbol versioning adds loads of flexibility to doing API changes without forcing soname bumps - bumps which in case of rpm are rather inconvenient. We should *finally* introduce symbol versioning to rpm libraries. -- 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/1127___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
