Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild logging tweaks (#1429)
@dmnks pushed 2 commits. 6fbfcfe7bb1dce6ce926602d6bc5800150c17994 Add rpmlogGetNrecsByMask() function a520b3fabbb744163cb9cad2441976e001549ec8 Add summary -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1429/files/768b3f4bc7dedefc1df903ba2abb3b96bcc2f86e..a520b3fabbb744163cb9cad2441976e001549ec8 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild logging tweaks (#1429)
@dmnks pushed 6 commits. 1c332a1cfd24ce98c0a765f93ac3d45c819df376 Add rpmlogPrettyPrint() function 09be300f7c97f8959c2ba983af079af413ca6d72 Refactor 2f05222886e6927a97b944d3029eed52a361e8b8 Ensure EOL in last line buffer 44c98a8a0d01e9ba7bfca3a3c986df1165219335 NOEOL 3def2912c3e05662ac1a8813330c89466a08b5bd Add rpmlogGetNrecsByMask() function 755f55d64d2c12bd1b67e3d8f62f8b117a78c3fa Add summary -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1429/files/8173d570998a91ade0c27e35d8ecd86f21c64a19..755f55d64d2c12bd1b67e3d8f62f8b117a78c3fa ___ 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 requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)
Merged #1394 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/1394#event-4032626671___ 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 requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)
@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/1394#pullrequestreview-537445098___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)
Anyway, this is superceded by #1395 and #1394 which I just updated, lets handle any remaining discussion there, closing. Thanks for bringing this upstream and helping find a nice resolution. -- 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/1393#issuecomment-732790505___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)
Closed #1393. -- 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/1393#event-4031865808___ 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 requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)
Update includes: - testcases added - a bug in the original version where the (GNU)HASH stuff depended on executability still - exeonly removed from elf.attr - rebased -- 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/1394#issuecomment-732787323___ 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 requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)
Actually this needs dropping the "exeonly" flag from elf.attr too - will update... -- 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/1394#issuecomment-732750607___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)
Revisiting some older comments here... Having dependency generation depend on executable bit only makes sense for those files whose behavior the executable bit actually changes. A library requires what it requires regardless of its permissions, but a program that cannot be executed doesn't require a thing. Which applies to scripts too. So I think I've managed to convince myself we're doing the right thing here... -- 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/1393#issuecomment-732750116___ 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] Subpackage for excluded files (#1448)
rubygem- packages exclude cached versions of the .gem package itself (I don't
want people to redistribute these, because they differ from the canonical
packages available on rubygems.org), so every package contains `%exclude
%{gem_cache}`. I don't think this one will be big deal to hide in
`%gem_install` macro.
But I was thinking about this again working on Ruby. For example these files
[[1]] should belong to the package. They are excluded just because there is
external rubygem-racc and there is possible collision. If I remove such files
in `%install` section, their exclusion will be less visible. You can note that
I keep the files section quite explicit to have control what really goes into
the packages. I work with the `%files` section all the time, while I touch the
`%install` section quite rarely.
Sometimes I wish there was more control about files in `%{buildroot}` and RPM
provided more insights, like "These are all files/directories which are in
`%{buildroot}` and should be packaged. From this list, these files were already
processed and there are sill few remaining". I know I could use filelists, but
they on the other side hides a lot of stuff from the .spec file.
[1]: This package is not the simplest one. I could scatter `rm` around, but
still, some files logically belongs somewhere and they are not there just
because of coll
--
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/1448#issuecomment-732748376___
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 dbus-announce plugin (#1255)
>From dnf-daemon point of view this plugin looks good and definitely useful. >I've just build rpm with this plugin enabled and I'm going to test how it >works. Thanks Florian! -- 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/1255#issuecomment-732722116___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)
Merged #1443 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/1443#event-4030856744___ 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] Subpackage for excluded files (#1448)
Out of curiosity, what's the thing that rubygems systematically exclude? -- 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/1448#issuecomment-732673881___ 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] Subpackage for excluded files (#1448)
I don't see rpm automatically creating such a package, but it's not like you *have to* ship every package that gets built. Happens in RHEL all the time, maybe Fedora should support the concept too? For example I could see packaging up tests being potentially useful for test-automation, but such packages hardly should be part of the distro itself. Distro composition is outside rpm jurisdiction though. -- 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/1448#issuecomment-732664724___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)
Okay, good to hear I wasn't alone loathing it :sweat_smile: Thanks for the review(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/1443#issuecomment-732659181___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
