Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Sorry, but how to build this repo? (Issue #2750)
@pmatilai converted this issue into discussion #2751. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2750#event-10896805830 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM 4.18.2 bugfix update (PR #2744)
@pmatilai approved this pull request. Just FWIW, looks fine to me. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744#pullrequestreview-1719573460 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %_sharedstatedir bad value in macros (%{_prefix}/com instead of /var/lib (Issue #2092)
Closed #2092 as completed via #2743. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2092#event-10896681726 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Set %_sharedstatedir to %{_var}/lib (PR #2743)
Merged #2743 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2743#event-10896681561 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39 (PR #2748)
@pmatilai approved this pull request. If you say so, but I find the notion of the host affecting something inside the Dockerfile (or vice versa) more than just a little mind-bending :flushed: On a related note, possible alternatives include just bumping the CI to F39 now that it's out, or disabling the repos with sed like we do for the h264 repo. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748#pullrequestreview-1719560386 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Sorry, but how to build this repo? (Issue #2750)
-- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2750 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix a macro in the comment (PR #2749)
Thanks for the patch. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749#issuecomment-1801222918 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix a macro in the comment (PR #2749)
Merged #2749 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749#event-10896589512 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] How can I find details on the binary representation of the RPM DB? (Discussion #2211)
And that prevents you from reporting bugs? If so, the security world is even sadder place than I thought. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2211#discussioncomment-7506935 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] How can I find details on the binary representation of the RPM DB? (Discussion #2211)
@pmatilai I, and I suspect @rhdesmond as well, are not comfortable creating a situation where a bug is not a security vulnerability in RPM, but is a security vulnerability in the downstream project. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2211#discussioncomment-7501644 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix a macro in the comment (PR #2749)
Nothing defines RPMHOME, replace it with RPM_CONFIGDIR. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749 -- Commit Summary -- * Fix a macro in the comment -- File Changes -- M macros.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39 (PR #2748)
@dmnks pushed 1 commit. 53f4c37f115d9fcfa42ebfdd03590dfcd35e33b6 Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39 -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748/files/732d057cbd966fa21fd3908c54a177813a279d77..53f4c37f115d9fcfa42ebfdd03590dfcd35e33b6 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39 (PR #2748)
The fedora-repos-modular package is gone from F39. This commit makes the Dockerfile work on a F39 host with the mktree.oci backend since we override the release with podman build --from fedora:39 ... there. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748 -- Commit Summary -- * Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39 -- File Changes -- M tests/Dockerfile.fedora (3) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] How can I find details on the binary representation of the RPM DB? (Discussion #2211)
Thanks for the detailed discussion all! @DemiMarie is correct; I understand @pmatilai's concerns about intended use and security impact. For now, we parse the db files (as other open source scanners do) as creating a runtime is prohibitively expensive as pointed out above. Appreciate the notes! -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2211#discussioncomment-7500519 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM 4.18.2 bugfix update (PR #2744)
Based on a separate discussion, cec4d24 isn't needed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744#issuecomment-1798732554 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM 4.18.2 bugfix update (PR #2744)
@dmnks pushed 1 commit. 34d36430b5f757f2b632d6c0959864e9efd6cd47 Add GitHub Actions workflow file for test-suite -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744/files/9680f8a9f426439559d2e3da38ab42b6328864c2..34d36430b5f757f2b632d6c0959864e9efd6cd47 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] File conflicts: Symlinked directories -> same file replaced by real directories -> unique files (#1458)
This indeed looks like a dupe of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936422 which #1684 was attempting
to fix. The actual, real transaction (assuming that a `%pretrans` scriptlet
removing the old symlink is present) does the right thing, this is just about
the *test* transaction (which DNF/YUM perform) where it fails.
A minimal package reproducing the issue:
```
%bcond_with new
Name: symlink
%if %{with new}
Version: 2
%else
Version: 1
%endif
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Symlink conflict test
License: GPL
%description
%{summary}.
%if %{with new}
%pretrans -p
path = "/opt/symlink/bar"
st = posix.stat(path)
if st and st.type == "link" then
os.remove(path)
end
%endif
%prep
%build
%install
mkdir -p %{buildroot}/opt/symlink/foo
echo hello > %{buildroot}/opt/symlink/foo/blah
%if %{with new}
mkdir -p %{buildroot}/opt/symlink/bar
echo new > %{buildroot}/opt/symlink/bar/blah
%else
ln -s foo %{buildroot}/opt/symlink/bar
%endif
%files
/opt/symlink
```
Usage:
```
$ rpmbuild -bb /path/to/symlink.spec # builds symlink-1-1 package
$ rpmbuild -bb --with new /path/to/symlink.spec # builds symlink-2-1 package
$ rpm -Uhv /path/to/symlink-1-1.rpm
$ rpm -Uhv --test /path/to/symlink-2-1.rpm # this should fail
$ rpm -Uhv /path/to/symlink-2-1.rpm # this should work
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1458#issuecomment-1798570225
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] File conflicts: Symlinked directories -> same file replaced by real directories -> unique files (#1458)
Yes, this issue is still present on master, the associated logic hasn't been changed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1458#issuecomment-1798450397 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] config file moving aid (#1296)
Yep, rpm has no means to track content moving around except through symlinks. I can see how it would be useful of course, but it'd require somehow recording such transformations in the package, and teaching the rest of rpm to honor those. Just a wild idea: perhaps file moving could be encoded in the file list as a virtual symlink (call it %alias or something) and have the fingerprinting code follow these. Something in that ballpark *may* be somehow feasible because it'd at least be basing of something rpm already knows. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1296#issuecomment-1798389183 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: file triggers v2 (Issue #2655)
We should support all the same features for a file list entry here, which also means being able to handle regular expressions. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2655#issuecomment-1798345651 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: split language specifics out of rpm core (#1199)
@pmatilai converted this issue into discussion #2747. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1199#event-10885554422 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: split language specifics out of rpm core (#1199)
As per the original posting, this actually belongs in discussions. And separate tickets for each split-off piece. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1199#issuecomment-1798328458 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: Make file attributes availble in %files (#1224)
Running file classification early has another potential beneficiary in #2207. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1224#issuecomment-1798309986 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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 better way to run and control buildroot policy (brp) scripts (Issue #2207)
Another interesting possibility would be hooking brp scripts to file attributes. This would require running the classifier much earlier, on the entire buildroot rather than per-package basis as it is now. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2207#issuecomment-1798309177 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] __spec_*_shell macros do not work (#1399)
Much of the __spec* template stuff simply has never been implemented. It's not rare for that era of rpm development, various apparent future plans have been written down like this (including public headers) but never actually wired to the code. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1399#issuecomment-1798276476 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: Convenient %version without tilde macro (#1219)
I believe this is now fixed with #2181, closing. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219#issuecomment-1798271272 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: Convenient %version without tilde macro (#1219)
Closed #1219 as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219#event-10885140277 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPMTAG_FILECLASS type mismatch (#1563)
This remains a design bug, basically, and should eventually be addressed one way or the other. One of the practical, not-incompatible things we could do is provide a way for Python to access the raw header data, whereas it currently is hardwired to always use extensions. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1563#issuecomment-1798260130 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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 to exclude files from %doc (#1298)
The `%doc` directive is just syntactic sugar for: 1. Install the given file in the build directory into the build root 2. Specify its absolute path in `%files` Now, `%doc` and `%license` are "special" files (as @ignatenkobrain noted) which are only processed *after* the normal file entries, meaning that an `%exclude` on such a file won't have any effect. There are two ways to work around this (limitation) in the SPEC file: 1. Don't use `%doc` and just install the files manually in the `%install` section (and optionally `%exclude` some afterwards, as usual) 2. Whitelist the desired files in `%doc` (globs are accepted there) Fixing this in RPM would be possible, I believe, the question is whether we really should. It seems like a rather niche use case and workarounds exist. I'll leave this open for now and discuss with the team. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1298#issuecomment-1798247402 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Uninformative error message on %include'd and generated spec content (Issue #2714)
The problem is of course far wider than just this one error message. To solve this, we need to refactor all spec-error reporting to a variable argument helper function which can then report filename, line number and such consistently though rpmlog(). -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2714#issuecomment-1798019266 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] openssl backend uses deprecated APIs (Issue #2294)
Closed #2294 as completed via #2723. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2294#event-10883272403 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Move OpenSSL code to newer API (PR #2723)
Merged #2723 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2723#event-10883272168 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Move OpenSSL code to newer API (PR #2723)
Okay, this has hung around long enough now. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2723#issuecomment-1798004671 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Refactor %__file_lineno management into an auxiliary macro (PR #2746)
Merged #2746 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2746#event-10883260238 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bunch of sysusers.d handling fixes (PR #2745)
Merged #2745 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2745#event-10883257925 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] built-in sysusers.d support fails to parse config files? (Issue #2741)
Closed #2741 as completed via a8ec768950f0adb9fb0c264596350fc929437ac8. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2741#event-10883258358 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
