Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM 4.20.0 ALPHA2 (PR #3107)

2024-06-01 Thread soig 
Le sam. 1 juin 2024 à 17:59, Thierry Vignaud ***@***.***> a
écrit :

> Le ven. 17 mai 2024 à 13:37, Michal Domonkos ***@***.***> a
> écrit :
>
>> Merged #3107 
>> into rpm-4.20.x.
>>
>> —
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> ,
>> or unsubscribe
>> 
>> .
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>>
>
> We are hitting 3 issues on Mageia with 4.20.x.
> Note that we all those upstream patches have been backported:
> 0001-Ensure-noarch-packages-don-t-get-debuginfo.patch
> 0001-Fix-noprep-regression-from-introducing-mkbuilddir.patch
> 0002-Drop-an-accidentally-added-duplicated-test.patch
> 0003-Make-build-in-place-much-less-of-a-hack-and-also-wor.patch
> 0001-Fix-incomplete-header-on-plain-src.rpm-build-modes-r.patch
> 0001-Hammer-in-no-debuginfo-for-noarch-packages-damn-it-r.patch
> 0001-Fix-regression-on-subpackage-debuginfo-RPMTAG_SOURCE.patch
>
> 1) signatures being refused
> This one seems to be on Mageia :
> error: Verifying a signature using certificate
> 00EDB89585B012A8916F0DF8B742FA8B80420F66 (Mageia Packages <
> ***@***.***>):
>   1. Certificiate B742FA8B80420F66 invalid: certificate is not alive
>   because: The primary key is not live
>   because: Expired on 2012-03-13T12:10:11Z
>   2. Key B742FA8B80420F66 invalid: key is not alive
>   because: The primary key is not live
>   because: Expired on 2012-03-13T12:10:11Z
>
> However this break "urpmi --no-verify" which used to behave like rpm
> --no-verify
> But now only rpm --nosignature can bypass this check, whereas rpm
> --no-verify used to do the same, which looks like regression ?
>
>
> 2) this breaks perl-RPM4's testsuite:
> See
> https://gitweb.mageia.org/software/rpm/perl-RPM4/tree/RPM4/t/04spec.t#n57
> This can be run with: cd RPM4; perl Makefile.PL; make && make test
>
> With rpm-4.19:
> ok 13 - simulate rpm -bp (check prep)
> Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /tmp/7ICL2x4Fnn/rpm-tmp.MpqXIY
>
> With rpm-4.20:
> +not ok 13 - simulate rpm -bp (check prep)
> +#   Failed test 'simulate rpm -bp (check prep)'
> +#   at t/04spec.t line 57.
> +Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX
> +/tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX: line 31: cd:
> /tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/test-rpm-1.0-build: No such file or directory
> +error: Bad exit status from /tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX (%build)
>
> There's a regression here: it doesn' create the directory anymore.
> Is this a rpm regression or does RPM4 needs to be adjusted?
> Both builddir and topdir are absolute
> The test spec file it loads is
> https://gitweb.mageia.org/software/rpm/perl-RPM4/tree/RPM4/t/test-rpm.spec
> I'd really like to have a feedback for this one.
>
>
> 3) urpmi testsuite fails b/o of missing debuginfo:
> error: Empty %files file
> /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/BUILD/a-1-build/debugsourcefiles.list
> error: Empty %files file
> /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/BUILD/b-1-build/debugsourcefiles.list
> But it's silly to try to extract debuginfo when there's no
> I could make those pkgs noarch or set debug_package to %{nil}
> On second though I wonder why this wasn't an issue before ?
>
> I fixed those ones in urpmi.
> But then I'm hitting this one:
> error: Bad exit status from
> /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/rpm-tmp.h09qUo (%install)
>
> #   Failed test 'rpmbuild --quiet --define '_topdir
> /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp' --define '_tmppath
> /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp' -bb --clean --nodeps  --define
> '__os_install_post %nil' --define 'rpm_version %(rpm -q --queryformat
> "%{VERSION}" rpm|sed -e "s/\\.//g")'  data/SPECS/buildroot_default.spec'
> will
>
> This can be reproduced by running:
> rpmbuild   -bb --clean  t/data/SPECS/buildroot_default.spec
> I've attached the rpmbuild output for both 4.19 & 4.20 which shows the
> regression
>
> Compare:
>
> rpm-4.19.1.1:
> $ rpm --eval %buildroot
> /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/%{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.x86_64
>
> rpm-4.19.91:
> $ rpm --eval %buildroot
> %buildroot
>
> I just saw commit 0310a233b953c015bd17ecfbb0e558ceaf071fc7 (" Fix a
> %buildroot regression on an early %__spec_install_pre %global override"),
> I'll try again with that commit backported, even though the context is
> different as it happens quite a lot later, at the end of the build process.
>

That commit didn't helped at all sadly
The issue is that the _buildrootdir macro disappeared in  commit
9d35c8df497534e1fbd806a4dc78802bcf35d7cb
I fear it'll break quite a lot of existing spec files :-(


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3107#issuecomment-2143547080
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM 4.20.0 ALPHA2 (PR #3107)

2024-06-01 Thread soig 
Le ven. 17 mai 2024 à 13:37, Michal Domonkos ***@***.***> a
écrit :

> Merged #3107 
> into rpm-4.20.x.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or unsubscribe
> 
> .
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>

We are hitting 3 issues on Mageia with 4.20.x.
Note that we all those upstream patches have been backported:
0001-Ensure-noarch-packages-don-t-get-debuginfo.patch
0001-Fix-noprep-regression-from-introducing-mkbuilddir.patch
0002-Drop-an-accidentally-added-duplicated-test.patch
0003-Make-build-in-place-much-less-of-a-hack-and-also-wor.patch
0001-Fix-incomplete-header-on-plain-src.rpm-build-modes-r.patch
0001-Hammer-in-no-debuginfo-for-noarch-packages-damn-it-r.patch
0001-Fix-regression-on-subpackage-debuginfo-RPMTAG_SOURCE.patch

1) signatures being refused
This one seems to be on Mageia :
error: Verifying a signature using certificate
00EDB89585B012A8916F0DF8B742FA8B80420F66 (Mageia Packages <
***@***.***>):
  1. Certificiate B742FA8B80420F66 invalid: certificate is not alive
  because: The primary key is not live
  because: Expired on 2012-03-13T12:10:11Z
  2. Key B742FA8B80420F66 invalid: key is not alive
  because: The primary key is not live
  because: Expired on 2012-03-13T12:10:11Z

However this break "urpmi --no-verify" which used to behave like rpm
--no-verify
But now only rpm --nosignature can bypass this check, whereas rpm
--no-verify used to do the same, which looks like regression ?


2) this breaks perl-RPM4's testsuite:
See
https://gitweb.mageia.org/software/rpm/perl-RPM4/tree/RPM4/t/04spec.t#n57
This can be run with: cd RPM4; perl Makefile.PL; make && make test

With rpm-4.19:
ok 13 - simulate rpm -bp (check prep)
Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /tmp/7ICL2x4Fnn/rpm-tmp.MpqXIY

With rpm-4.20:
+not ok 13 - simulate rpm -bp (check prep)
+#   Failed test 'simulate rpm -bp (check prep)'
+#   at t/04spec.t line 57.
+Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX
+/tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX: line 31: cd:
/tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/test-rpm-1.0-build: No such file or directory
+error: Bad exit status from /tmp/Cb7Sykk9CP/rpm-tmp.H778zX (%build)

There's a regression here: it doesn' create the directory anymore.
Is this a rpm regression or does RPM4 needs to be adjusted?
Both builddir and topdir are absolute
The test spec file it loads is
https://gitweb.mageia.org/software/rpm/perl-RPM4/tree/RPM4/t/test-rpm.spec
I'd really like to have a feedback for this one.


3) urpmi testsuite fails b/o of missing debuginfo:
error: Empty %files file
/home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/BUILD/a-1-build/debugsourcefiles.list
error: Empty %files file
/home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/BUILD/b-1-build/debugsourcefiles.list
But it's silly to try to extract debuginfo when there's no
I could make those pkgs noarch or set debug_package to %{nil}
On second though I wonder why this wasn't an issue before ?

I fixed those ones in urpmi.
But then I'm hitting this one:
error: Bad exit status from /home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp/rpm-tmp.h09qUo
(%install)

#   Failed test 'rpmbuild --quiet --define '_topdir
/home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp' --define '_tmppath
/home/tv/mga/git/mga/urpmi/t/tmp' -bb --clean --nodeps  --define
'__os_install_post %nil' --define 'rpm_version %(rpm -q --queryformat
"%{VERSION}" rpm|sed -e "s/\\.//g")'  data/SPECS/buildroot_default.spec'
will

This can be reproduced by running:
rpmbuild   -bb --clean  t/data/SPECS/buildroot_default.spec
I've attached the rpmbuild output for both 4.19 & 4.20 which shows the
regression

Compare:

rpm-4.19.1.1:
$ rpm --eval %buildroot
/home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/%{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.x86_64

rpm-4.19.91:
$ rpm --eval %buildroot
%buildroot

I just saw commit 0310a233b953c015bd17ecfbb0e558ceaf071fc7 (" Fix a
%buildroot regression on an early %__spec_install_pre %global override"),
I'll try again with that commit backported, even though the context is
different as it happens quite a lot later, at the end of the build process.

See you

Message ID:  github.com>
>

$ LC_ALL=C rpmbuild   -bb --clean  t/data/SPECS/buildroot_default.spec
Executing(%install): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.DxJCOX
+ umask 022
+ cd /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILD
+ '[' 1 -eq 1 ']'
+ '[' /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64 '!=' / ']'
+ rm -rf /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64
++ dirname /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64
+ mkdir -p /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT
+ mkdir /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64
+ '[' 1 -eq 1 ']'
++ echo /home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64
++ sed 's!//!/!'
+ wanted=/home/tv/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildroot-1-1.x86_64
+ echo 'buildroot

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm-4.17.0beta1 fails to build because pandoc is unavailable (#1729)

2021-06-29 Thread soig 
Those fixes should be backported into rpm-4.17.x branch !

-- 
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/1729#issuecomment-870572440___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Don't depend on translation sub directories (89eb448)

2021-06-29 Thread soig 
Those fixes should be backported into rpm-4.17.x branch !

-- 
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/89eb448b6c5941921acdc7e8b5e18050900e9f20#commitcomment-52809719___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Brown paper back fixes for the new style man pages (#1730)

2021-06-22 Thread soig 
@soig approved this pull request.

This fixes the building process 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/1730#pullrequestreview-689747567___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Brown paper back fixes for the new style man pages (#1730)

2021-06-22 Thread soig 
@soig 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/1730#pullrequestreview-689747127___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Brown paper back fixes for the new style man pages (#1730)

2021-06-22 Thread soig 
I confirm those commits fix 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1729 (which should maybe 
referenced in the commits chlogs?)

-- 
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/1730#issuecomment-866075652___
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-4.17.0beta1 fails to build because pandoc is unavailable (#1729)

2021-06-22 Thread soig 
Having to depends on Haskell in order to build rpm is big bullet to swallow !

-- 
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/1729#issuecomment-866024265___
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 version to appear newer than 4.17 and begin another cycle (5fc9783)

2021-06-22 Thread soig 
Was it really intended to alter signatures in testsuite when bumping version 樂?

-- 
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/5fc97833727226fbe319bada78ceb16b6007512a#commitcomment-52491237___
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 4.16.90 breaks perl-RPM4's testsuite (actually it's the sqlite backend) (#1693)

2021-06-05 Thread soig 
Strange, the same error happens with nbd backend too.
What's puzzling is that   URPM::Transaction->DESTROY and 
RPM4::Transaction->DESTROY looks similar and both free the transaction:

- https://metacpan.org/release/URPM/source/URPM.xs#L2582
- https://metacpan.org/source/TVIGNAUD/RPM4-0.44/src/RPM4.xs#L1417

After looking again, the bug is the reverse of what I though:

- ndb/sqlite behaviour is sane as the transaction was run with JUSTDB!
- It's actually the bdb backend that exposes a bogus behaviour as the pkg can 
be found in the db whereas the transaction was run with JUSTDB flag!

See https://metacpan.org/source/TVIGNAUD/RPM4-0.44/t/05transaction.t#L79

I've inherited that code that I just maintain (because other tools rely on it) 
since the switch from jbj rpm 4.4 to rpm.org 4.6 but there's definitive oddness 
here! 

[dbg3.txt](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/files/6602596/dbg3.txt)

-- 
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/1693#issuecomment-855251000___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm 4.16.90 breaks perl-RPM4's testsuite (actually it's the sqlite backend) (#1693)

2021-06-02 Thread soig 
rpm 4.16.90 breaks perl-RPM4's testsuite.
I've tested with the fix for rpmv3 packages which makes no changes.
(It does however fix urpmi testsuite)

- Rollbacking to 4.16.1.3 (with default bdb backend) fixes it.
- Rollbacking to 4.16.1.3 with sqlite as default backend shows the same errors.

So it's the switch from the bdb to the sqlite backend that is the root cause.
RPM4 can be downloaded from:
https://metacpan.org/release/RPM4

Just:
1. unpack it
3. run "perl Makefile.PL"
4. run "make"
5. run "make test"

You can duplicate the offending bits by running:
`perl -Iblib/lib/ -Iblib/arch/ t/05transaction.t`

p2.diff.txt is a patch for forcing the BDB backend (which will only works with 
4.16.1.3 obviously)
p1.diff.txt is the resulting diff in the test output.
We gain warning about "using deprecated bdb database backend" but all tests now 
pass.

dbg.diff.txt is a patch against the testsuite in order to display more info.
dbg.txt is the output of the t/05transaction.t with that patch.
It shows that the pkg is in the transaction.
But when the backend is sqlite, the package hasn't been installed: it doesn't 
show up in rpmdb!
(see the debug lines beginning with ">> "

One could argue that the manner of closing the db is an issue:
See https://metacpan.org/source/TVIGNAUD/RPM4-0.44/t/05transaction.t#L95
But I think this uncover a can of potential affected users in the wild.


[dbg.txt](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/files/6587024/dbg.txt)
[dbg.diff.txt](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/files/6587027/dbg.diff.txt)
[p2.diff.txt](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/files/6587032/p2.diff.txt)
[p1.diff.txt](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/files/6587033/p1.diff.txt)



-- 
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/1693___
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] Provide install time alternative to `%{?_isa}` (#1344)

2020-09-16 Thread soig 
Le mer. 26 août 2020 à 15:00, Vít Ondruch  a
écrit :

> It would be nice if we had install time alternative to %{?_isa}. That
> would help to pull in the right arch package from noarch package.
>
> My use case is to have rubygem-ruby-vips, where this is noarch package is
> using libffi to load libraries, to `Requires: "libvips.so.42%{?_isa}",
> where this would pull in the right library according to target installation
> platform.
>
> This [1 ] is the
> original ticket I have reported against DNF just to just discover that DNF
> is doing the right thing when rubygem-ruby-vips specifies only Requires:
> "libvips.so.42. Obviously, specifying Requires: "libvips.so.42%{?_isa}
> would not improve the situation, because the randomly used builder arch
> would make the issue even worse.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or
> unsubscribe
> 
> .
>

One could argue that such a noarch package isn't really noarch anymore…
Maybe it's better to make it arched in such a 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/issues/1344#issuecomment-693388620___
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 use of %apply_patch easier (#1357)

2020-09-16 Thread soig 
Le mar. 8 sept. 2020 à 11:21, Vít Ondruch  a
écrit :

> I need to use git to apply binary patch. Therefore I thought about using
> %apply_patch and I ended up using the following:
>
> %global __scm git_am
> %{expand:%__scm_setup_%{__scm}}
> %apply_patch -p1 %{PATCH4}
>
> This is suboptimal, because I believe that the doubleunderscore macros are
> implementation detail and should not be used. You might admit that I should
> use %autosetup but I can't use it, because this is the current %setup
> line:
>
> %setup -n %{gem_name}-%{version} -b 1 -b 3
>
> i.e. it expands more sources prior expanding the main source and I don't
> think this is supported by %autosetup. So I have to keep using the %setup.
>

You can always use %autopatch in that case…
%autosetup is basically %setup + %autopatch (modulo some defaults)

So I thinking about two possible extensions:
>
>1. Allow to disable the %setup call from %autosetup.
>2. Providing something like %setup_scm which would actually do the
>necessary setup for %apply_patch.
>
> Please also note that on top of that, I actually need to apply patches in
> the %{_builddir}, so the current implementation is very limiting.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or
> unsubscribe
> 
> .
>


-- 
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/1357#issuecomment-693352194___
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 generators errors are ignored (#1183)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
For references, here's the fallout:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1285

-- 
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/1183#issuecomment-648710531___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Beta3 has a new broken test (235: rpmsigdig.at:144 rpmkeys -Kv 2 rpmkeys digest) (#1288)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Indeed we can close this one.
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1289 is the only 
remaining issue with beta3

-- 
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/1288#issuecomment-648707604___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Since beta2 introducing // mode, some files are not removable during %clean (#1289)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Actually with beta3, I can reproduce it locally:
$ LC_ALL=C rm -fr BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/
(…)
rm: cannot remove 
'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/data/SPECS/test-subpackages-pathpostfixes.spec':
 Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 
'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/data/SPECS/ifmultiline.spec': Permission 
denied
rm: cannot remove 
'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/data/SPECS/flangtest.spec': Permission 
denied
rm: cannot remove 'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/data/misc/hello.intro': 
Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 
'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/data/misc/hello.payload': Permission 
denied
rm: cannot remove 'BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/testing/bin': Permission denied


-- 
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/1289#issuecomment-648704998___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Since beta2 introducing // mode, some files are not removable during %clean (#1289)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Since beta2 introducing parallel mode, some files are not removable.
See build*.log at 
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623141813.tv.duvel.19852/log/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8/
(…)

Wrote: 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/rpm-apidocs-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8.noarch.rpm
Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /home/iurt/rpmbuild/tmp/rpm-tmp.ClaJkJ
+ umask 022
+ cd /home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD
+ cd rpm-4.16.0-beta2
+ /usr/bin/rm -rf /home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8.x86_64
+ RPM_EC=0
++ jobs -p
+ exit 0
Executing(--clean): /bin/sh -e /home/iurt/rpmbuild/tmp/rpm-tmp.RZOwSI
+ umask 022
+ cd /home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD
+ rm -rf rpm-4.16.0-beta2
rm: cannot remove 'rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/testing/data/misc/hello.payload': 
Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 'rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/testing/data/misc/hello.intro': 
Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 'rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/testing/data/macros.testfile': 
Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 
'rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/testing/data/SOURCES/hello-1.0-modernize.patch': 
Permission denied
rm: cannot remove 'rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/testing/data/SOURCES/bar.c': 
Permission denied

This didn't happen in my prior local build, so I guess it depends on umask.
I "fixed" it with "chmod -R +w tests/testing/":
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SPECS/rpm.spec?r1=1598795=1598794=1598795

-- 
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/1289___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Beta3 has a new broken test (235: rpmsigdig.at:144 rpmkeys -Kv 2 rpmkeys digest) (#1288)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Beta2 was fine besides "rpmbuild.at:482 Dependency generation 3 build":
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/done/cauldron/core/release/20200623145307.tv.duvel.658/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8/

But beta3 introduces a new failure. See build*.log files & look for "Summary of 
the failures" at:
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/done/cauldron/core/release/20200624083544.tv.duvel.13457/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta3.1.mga8/
(using // testsuite)


 235: rpmsigdig.at:144   rpmkeys -Kv  2
  rpmkeys digest

## -- ##
## Detailed failed tests. ##
## -- ##

# -*- compilation -*-
235. rpmsigdig.at:144: testing rpmkeys -Kv  2 ...
./rpmsigdig.at:146:


if ! [ -d testing/ ]; then
cp -aP "${RPMTEST}" .
chmod -R u+w testing/
mkdir -p testing/build
ln -s ../data/SOURCES testing/build/
fi
export RPMTEST="${PWD}/testing"
export TOPDIR="${RPMTEST}/build"
export HOME="${RPMTEST}"

rm -rf "${RPMTEST}"`rpm --eval '%_dbpath'`/*
runroot rpm --initdb


runroot rpmbuild -bb --quiet \
--define "%optflags -O2 -g" \
--define "%_target_platform noarch-linux" \
--define "%_binary_payload w.ufdio" \
--define "%_buildhost localhost" \
--define "%use_source_date_epoch_as_buildtime 1" \
--define "%source_date_epoch_from_changelog 1" \
--define "%clamp_mtime_to_source_date_epoch 1" \
/data/SPECS/attrtest.spec
for v in SHA256HEADER SHA1HEADER SIGMD5 PAYLOADDIGEST PAYLOADDIGESTALT; do
runroot rpm -q --qf "${v}: %{${v}}\n" 
/build/RPMS/noarch/attrtest-1.0-1.noarch.rpm
done
runroot rpmkeys -Kv /build/RPMS/noarch/attrtest-1.0-1.noarch.rpm

--- -   2020-06-24 08:37:24.201578966 +
+++ 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta3/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/235/stdout
  2020-06-24 08:37:24.186383200 +
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-SHA256HEADER: 6104d0f021dfe58af39b1957fa222762a45cbec221b10915d61d5238858f3c28
-SHA1HEADER: e58516622b8b8960201d07e7b061af8bc21fcaef
-SIGMD5: 09ca69da1b4a85c202c377da3cf20048
+SHA256HEADER: 24790a8639dec5e0d4506f8ebacba0844b41bfd1aeecf7542251cafdebd1f7f3
+SHA1HEADER: 3539a6132ce89ef2296f5db3ce90f7991891e739
+SIGMD5: 4a51b31c3e136b3c5b3971f3d1811a7b
 PAYLOADDIGEST: 749d8980cc5889419da8cdbe9a5b3292742af8a227db3635f84966481b7612a8
 PAYLOADDIGESTALT: 
749d8980cc5889419da8cdbe9a5b3292742af8a227db3635f84966481b7612a8
 /build/RPMS/noarch/attrtest-1.0-1.noarch.rpm:
235. rpmsigdig.at:144: 235. rpmkeys -Kv  2 (rpmsigdig.at:144): FAILED 
(rpmsigdig.at:146)


## - ##

-- 
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/1288___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Architecture is hardcoded in new test and thus it fails on anything not x86_64 :-( (#1284)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
This one is still not fixed in 4.16.0 beta3  AFAIK…

-- 
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/1284#issuecomment-648681367___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Not ignoring generator failure shows strange issue (#1285)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Adding:
+   printf("mname='%s', cmd='%s' (callable=%d)\n", mname, cmd, callable);

Shows the following:
grep _font RES1 -1
mname='__elf_provides', cmd='/usr/lib/rpm/elfdeps --provides  ' (callable=0)
mname='__font_provides', cmd=' ' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_provides', cmd='/usr/lib/rpm/gi-find-deps.sh -P ' 
(callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_requires', cmd='/usr/lib/rpm/elfdeps --requires  ' (callable=0)
mname='__font_requires', cmd=' ' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_requires', cmd='/usr/lib/rpm/gi-find-deps.sh -R ' 
(callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_recommends', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_recommends', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_recommends', cmd='' (callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_suggests', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_suggests', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_suggests', cmd='' (callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_supplements', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_supplements', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_supplements', cmd='' (callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_enhances', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_enhances', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_enhances', cmd='' (callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_conflicts', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_conflicts', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_conflicts', cmd='' (callable=0)
--
mname='__elf_obsoletes', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__font_obsoletes', cmd='' (callable=0)
mname='__gobjectintrospection_obsoletes', cmd='' (callable=0)

So for both __font_requires  & __font_provides, applyAttr generates a one char 
(space) command for font…

-- 
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/1285#issuecomment-648628790___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Always fail build on dependency generator failures (#1183) (#1271)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Le mer. 24 juin 2020 à 08:38, Panu Matilainen  a
écrit :

> On 6/24/20 9:30 AM, soig wrote:
> > Also rpm's own fontconfig.prov is broken:
> >
> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/updates_testing/20200624045432.daviddavid.duvel.28729/log/plasma-desktop-5.19.2-1.mga8/build.0.20200624045513.log
> >
> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623223351.luigiwalser.duvel.10411/log/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8/build.0.20200623223403.log
> > disabling /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr makes the issue go away
> >
>
> Please open separate tickets for such findings, comments on past commits
> will easily go unseen and/or forgotten.
>
> - Panu -
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you commented.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1271#issuecomment-648623641>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXGVEK5LLACGNZRPLC5DY3RYGNOJANCNFSM4OAPN7RQ>
> .
>
Done
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1285
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1284


-- 
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/1271#issuecomment-648624913___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Not ignoring generator failure shows strange issue (#1285)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
rpm's own fontconfig.prov is broken:
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/updates_testing/20200624045432.daviddavid.duvel.28729/log/plasma-desktop-5.19.2-1.mga8/build.0.20200624045513.log
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623223351.luigiwalser.duvel.10411/log/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8/build.0.20200623223403.log
disabling /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr makes the issue go away

Ex:

$ sudo mv /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr{,.no}
$ LC_ALL=C rpmbuild --short-circuit --define "_topdir $PWD" -ba SPECS/feh.spec  
(…)
Wrote: /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Wrote: /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-debugsource-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Wrote: /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-debuginfo-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3qCi65
+ umask 022
+ cd /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILD
+ cd feh-3.4.1
+ /usr/bin/rm -rf /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64
+ RPM_EC=0
++ jobs -p
+ exit 0

$ sudo mv /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr{.no,}
$ LC_ALL=C rpmbuild --short-circuit --define "_topdir $PWD" -ba SPECS/feh.spec  
(…)
error: Requirename generator   failed: 
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64/usr/share/feh/fonts/yudit.ttf
Provides: application() application(feh.desktop) feh = 3.4.1-1.mga8 feh(x86-64) 
= 3.4.1-1.mga8 mimehandler(image/bmp) mimehandler(image/gif) 
mimehandler(image/jpeg) mimehandler(image/jpg) mimehandler(image/pjpeg) 
mimehandler(image/png) mimehandler(image/tiff) mimehandler(image/webp) 
mimehandler(image/x-bmp) mimehandler(image/x-pcx) mimehandler(image/x-png) 
mimehandler(image/x-portable-anymap) mimehandler(image/x-portable-bitmap) 
mimehandler(image/x-portable-graymap) mimehandler(image/x-portable-pixmap) 
mimehandler(image/x-tga) mimehandler(image/x-xbitmap)
Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 
4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
Requires: libImlib2.so.1()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) 
libXinerama.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.11)(64bit) 
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15)(64bit) 
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) 
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libcurl.so.4()(64bit) libexif.so.12()(64bit) 
libm.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libpng16.so.16()(64bit) 
libpng16.so.16(PNG16_0)(64bit)
Recommends: imagemagick jpeg-progs


RPM build errors:
Requirename generator   failed: 
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64/usr/share/feh/fonts/yudit.ttf


Which is strange as fontconfig.prov returns 0…

The strangest thing is that 'cmd' seems to be an empty string 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/issues/1285___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Architecture is hardcoded in new test and thus it fails on anything not x86_64 :-( (#1284)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Architecture is hardcoded in test and thus it fails on anything not x86_64 :-(

See 
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623135516.tv.duvel.30441/log/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8/build.0.20200623135605.log

--- -   2020-06-23 13:59:13.826080861 +
+++ 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/329/stderr
  2020-06-23 13:59:13.811945165 +
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
-error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req  failed: 
/build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
-Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req  failed: 
/build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
+error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req  failed: 
/build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
+Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req  failed: 
/build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
 
329. rpmbuild.at:482: 329. Dependency generation 3 (rpmbuild.at:482): FAILED 
(rpmbuild.at:505)

-- 
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/1284___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Always fail build on dependency generator failures (#1183) (#1271)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Ex:

$ sudo mv /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr{,.no}
$ LC_ALL=C rpmbuild --short-circuit --define "_topdir $PWD" -ba
SPECS/feh.spec
(…)
Wrote: /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Wrote:
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-debugsource-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Wrote:
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/RPMS/x86_64/feh-debuginfo-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64.rpm
Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3qCi65
+ umask 022
+ cd /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILD
+ cd feh-3.4.1
+ /usr/bin/rm -rf /home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64
+ RPM_EC=0
++ jobs -p
+ exit 0

$ sudo mv /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr{.no,}
$ LC_ALL=C rpmbuild --short-circuit --define "_topdir $PWD" -ba
SPECS/feh.spec
(…)
error: Requirename generator   failed:
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64/usr/share/feh/fonts/yudit.ttf
Provides: application() application(feh.desktop) feh = 3.4.1-1.mga8
feh(x86-64) = 3.4.1-1.mga8 mimehandler(image/bmp) mimehandler(image/gif)
mimehandler(image/jpeg) mimehandler(image/jpg) mimehandler(image/pjpeg)
mimehandler(image/png) mimehandler(image/tiff) mimehandler(image/webp)
mimehandler(image/x-bmp) mimehandler(image/x-pcx) mimehandler(image/x-png)
mimehandler(image/x-portable-anymap) mimehandler(image/x-portable-bitmap)
mimehandler(image/x-portable-graymap) mimehandler(image/x-portable-pixmap)
mimehandler(image/x-tga) mimehandler(image/x-xbitmap)
Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
Requires: libImlib2.so.1()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit)
libXinerama.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.11)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libcurl.so.4()(64bit) libexif.so.12()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libpng16.so.16()(64bit)
libpng16.so.16(PNG16_0)(64bit)
Recommends: imagemagick jpeg-progs


RPM build errors:
Requirename generator   failed:
/home/tv/mga/pkgs/feh/BUILDROOT/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8.x86_64/usr/share/feh/fonts/yudit.ttf


Which is strange as fontconfig.prov returns 0…


Le mer. 24 juin 2020 à 08:29, Thierry Vignaud  a
écrit :

> Also rpm's own fontconfig.prov is broken:
>
> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/updates_testing/20200624045432.daviddavid.duvel.28729/log/plasma-desktop-5.19.2-1.mga8/build.0.20200624045513.log
>
> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623223351.luigiwalser.duvel.10411/log/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8/build.0.20200623223403.log
> disabling /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr makes the issue go away
>
> Le mar. 23 juin 2020 à 16:16, rpm-maint  a
> écrit :
>
>> Architecture is hardcoded in test and thus it fails on anything not x86_64
>> :-(
>>
>> See
>>
>> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623135516.tv.duvel.30441/log/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8/build.0.20200623135605.log
>>
>> --- - 2020-06-23 13:59:13.826080861 +
>> +++
>> /home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/329/stderr
>> 2020-06-23
>> 13:59:13.811945165 +
>> @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
>> -error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
>> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
>> - Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
>> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
>> +error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
>> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
>> + Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
>> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
>>
>> 329. rpmbuild.at:482: 329. Dependency generation 3 (rpmbuild.at:482):
>> FAILED (rpmbuild.at:505)
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 23 juin 2020 à 12:01, Panu Matilainen 
>> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > Merged #1271 
>> > into master.
>> >
>> > —
>> > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> > <
>> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1271#event-3472161361
>> >,
>> > or unsubscribe
>> > <
>> https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADLPZU6TKOLLFK7O32BLNDLRYB4QTANCNFSM4OAPN7RQ
>> >
>> > .
>> > ___
>> > Rpm-maint mailing list
>> > Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
>> > http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
>> >
>>
>> —
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> ,
>> or unsubscribe
>> 
>> .
>>
>


-- 
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Always fail build on dependency generator failures (#1183) (#1271)

2020-06-24 Thread soig 
Also rpm's own fontconfig.prov is broken:
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/updates_testing/20200624045432.daviddavid.duvel.28729/log/plasma-desktop-5.19.2-1.mga8/build.0.20200624045513.log
http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623223351.luigiwalser.duvel.10411/log/feh-3.4.1-1.mga8/build.0.20200623223403.log
disabling /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/font.attr makes the issue go away

Le mar. 23 juin 2020 à 16:16, rpm-maint  a écrit :

> Architecture is hardcoded in test and thus it fails on anything not x86_64
> :-(
>
> See
>
> http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/cauldron/core/release/20200623135516.tv.duvel.30441/log/rpm-4.16.0-0.beta2.1.mga8/build.0.20200623135605.log
>
> --- - 2020-06-23 13:59:13.826080861 +
> +++
> /home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/rpm-4.16.0-beta2/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/329/stderr
> 2020-06-23
> 13:59:13.811945165 +
> @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
> -error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
> - Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.x86_64/bin/shebang
> +error: Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
> + Requirename generator /tmp/fail.req failed:
> /build/BUILDROOT/shebang-0.1-1.i386/bin/shebang
>
> 329. rpmbuild.at:482: 329. Dependency generation 3 (rpmbuild.at:482):
> FAILED (rpmbuild.at:505)
>
>
> Le mar. 23 juin 2020 à 12:01, Panu Matilainen  a
> écrit :
>
> > Merged #1271 
> > into master.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1271#event-3472161361
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
> https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADLPZU6TKOLLFK7O32BLNDLRYB4QTANCNFSM4OAPN7RQ
> >
> > .
> > ___
> > Rpm-maint mailing list
> > Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
> > http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or unsubscribe
> 
> .
>


-- 
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/1271#issuecomment-648620251___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] only install rpm-plugin-selinux.8 if enabled (#1248)

2020-06-02 Thread soig 
This fixes installing rpm-plugin-selinux.8 even when using configure 
--disable-selinux

(cherry picked from commit 35c7190a78488a84155d21bb4e7335ced98bba26)
Basically a backport of pull #1247 …


You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1248

-- Commit Summary --

  * only install rpm-plugin-selinux.8 if enabled

-- File Changes --

M doc/Makefile.am (5)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1248.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1248.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/1248
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] only install rpm-plugin-selinux.8 if enabled (#1247)

2020-06-02 Thread soig 
This fixes installing rpm-plugin-selinux.8 even when using configure 
--disable-selinux
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1247

-- Commit Summary --

  * only install rpm-plugin-selinux.8 if enabled

-- File Changes --

M doc/Makefile.am (5)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1247.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1247.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/1247
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document all of rpmdeps options (#1157)

2020-04-27 Thread soig 
2nd commit has been droped 

-- 
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/1157#issuecomment-619849387___
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-4.16.0a regression in rpmbuild: "Tag takes single token only" (#1167)

2020-04-08 Thread soig 
Damns you're right:
$ rpm -q rpm
rpm-4.15.1-3.mga8
$ rpm --eval %mkrel
%{1}.mga8
$  sudo urpmi --auto-select
(…)
$ rpm -q rpm
rpm-4.15.90-0.git14971.0.3.mga8.x86_64
$ rpm --eval %mkrel
%mkrel

Here's the output of rpm --showrc|grep ^Macro for both:
-Macro path: 
/usr/lib/rpm/macros:/usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.*:/usr/lib/rpm/platform/%{_target}/macros:/usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/*.attr:/usr/lib/rpm/mageia/macros:/etc/rpm/macros.d/*.macros:/etc/rpm/macros.*:/etc/rpm/macros:/etc/rpm/%{_target}/macros:~/.rpmmacros
+Macro path: 
/usr/lib/rpm/macros:/usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.*:/usr/lib/rpm/platform/%{_target}/macros:/usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/*.attr:/usr/lib/rpm/Mageia/macros:/etc/rpm/macros.d/*.macros:/etc/rpm/macros.*:/etc/rpm/macros:/etc/rpm/%{_target}/macros:~/.rpmmacros

The actual difference being:
-/usr/lib/rpm/mageia/macros
+/usr/lib/rpm/Mageia/macros

Because I added:
--with-vendor=%{_vendor} \
However:
$ rpm --eval %_vendor
Mageia

You're right again…

My mess :-(

-- 
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/1167#issuecomment-610922387___
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-4.16.0a regression in rpmbuild: "Tag takes single token only" (#1167)

2020-04-08 Thread soig 
Closed #1167.

-- 
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/1167#event-3213830018___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm-4.16.0a regression in rpmbuild: "Tag takes single token only" (#1167)

2020-04-08 Thread soig 
Hi
There's a regression in rpmbuild in 4.16.0 alpha:
$ rpmbuild -ba ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/foobar.spec
error: line 5: Tag takes single token only: Release:%{mkrel 1}

This basically breaks building all of 13 000 packages in Mageia because all of 
them use this:
Release: %mkrel 1

Which expands to a nicely formatted release number according to the distro 
version (similar to %{dist} in Fedora).

Mkrel is defined as:
%mkrel(c:) %{-c: 
0.%{-c*}.}%{1}%{?subrel:.%subrel}%{?dist:%dist}%{?!dist:%__dist_ident}%([ 
"%{__distro_section}" != "core" ] && echo .%__distro_section)

Can you please rollback that change?
Thanks

-- 
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/1167___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Duplicate provides not merged (manual + fileattr) (#1166)

2020-04-07 Thread soig 
Merging manual provides with automatic provides (with manual ones
overriding automatic ones) would prevent us to detect manual provides that
can be removed b/c the automation took care of it…

Le mar. 7 avr. 2020 à 13:09, Miro Hrončok  a
écrit :

> Would it be to hackish to merge 0 with whatever is generated by
> generators, preserving 0 (as in: the manual one wins over the generated
> one).
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or unsubscribe
> 
> .
>


-- 
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/1166#issuecomment-610331463___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] 4.16: no longer possible to package invalid symlink (#1159)

2020-04-02 Thread soig 
Le mer. 1 avr. 2020 à 21:54, Ed Santiago  a
écrit :

> We have a package, buildah ,
> that includes a symlink loop
> 
> as part of its -tests subpackage:
>
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 esm esm   13 Oct 21 05:53 circular-link -> circular-link
>
> This has packaged up just fine, up to and including
> rpm-4.15.1-2.fc32.1.x86_64
>
> As of rpm-4.15.90-0.git14971.1.fc33.x86_64, rpmbuild fails with:
>
> RPM build errors:
> Recognition of file 
> "/root/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/buildah-1.15.0-0.22.dev.git912ca5a.fc33.x86_64/usr/share/buildah/test/system/bud/dockerignore2/subdir/circular-link"
>  failed: mode 120777 broken symbolic link to circular-link (Too many levels 
> of symbolic links)
>
> My lame guess is that c6ff614
> 
> is responsible.
>
> I realize this is an obscure corner case and that in fact it may be
> desirable in most cases to catch this condition. This is, however, a
> regression and places us in a difficult situation wrt packaging our tests.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or
> unsubscribe
> 
> .
>

You can always package it as %ghost and actually create it in %post …


-- 
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/1159#issuecomment-607657219___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document all of rpmdeps options (#1157)

2020-04-01 Thread soig 
Patch updated (semi automatic description of options is not always a good idea 
:-( )

-- 
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/1157#issuecomment-607339902___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document all of rpmdeps options (#1157)

2020-04-01 Thread soig 
@soig pushed 2 commits.

0f559437a8892f81d29e345e43b1d1ccd62e2a99  describe all rpmdeps options
e67395de9df1c4ac449ec251a70a6a3d37f53a2d  update


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1157/files/d833421b3f082d54af2b0474c951aa758cded7e4..e67395de9df1c4ac449ec251a70a6a3d37f53a2d
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document all of rpmdeps options (#1157)

2020-04-01 Thread soig 
This will update the man page in order to describe all rpmdeps options.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1157

-- Commit Summary --

  * describe all rpmdeps options
  * update

-- File Changes --

M doc/rpmdeps.8 (29)
M po/br.po (12)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1157.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1157.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/1157
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] fix testsuite on Mageia (#1156)

2020-04-01 Thread soig 
it consistently fails b/c readelf returns more stuff:

$ readelf --debug-dump=info ./usr/lib/debug/usr/local/bin/hello2*.debug | grep 
comp_dir
24   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
43   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
86   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
a5   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x0): 
/usr/src/debug/hello-1.0
3ff   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
5dd   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu

$ readelf --debug-dump=info ./usr/lib/debug/usr/local/bin/hello2*.debug| 
grep csu
24   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
43   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
86   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
3ff   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu
4df   DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0x391): 
__libc_csu_fini
4f9   DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0x474): 
__libc_csu_init
5dd   DW_AT_comp_dir: (indirect string, offset: 0x52a): 
/home/iurt/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.31/csu

I dont know why it works on Fedora but lets filter glibcs csu 
and voila
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1156

-- Commit Summary --

  * fix testsuite on Mageia

-- File Changes --

M tests/rpmbuild.at (4)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1156.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1156.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/1156
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Flush 1998 vintage dirent.h and fcntl.h compatibility mess from system.h (#1146)

2020-03-30 Thread soig 
Looks good

-- 
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/1146#issuecomment-605953855___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix phrasing & package one more man page (#1145)

2020-03-30 Thread soig 

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1145

-- Commit Summary --

  * fix phrasing
  * also package rpm-plugins.8

-- File Changes --

M doc/Makefile.am (1)
M doc/rpm-plugin-prioreset.8 (2)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1145.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1145.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/1145
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] actually include the new man pages (#1144)

2020-03-30 Thread soig 
https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.16.0 says Add man pages for all plugins 
and rpm2archive (#1016)
However RPM 4.16.0 alpha doesnt actually include them…
Ahem

This pull request actually includes the new man pages  the tarball and thus the 
vendor rpms… :-)
Thanks
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1144

-- Commit Summary --

  * actually include the new man pages

-- File Changes --

M doc/Makefile.am (5)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1144.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1144.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/1144
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] fix zstd magic (#991)

2019-12-25 Thread soig 
I spot it while adding support for zstd compressed metadata in
URPM/urpmi, which was broken by this typo

typo introduced in commit 3684424fe297c996bb05bb64631336fa2903df12

This fixes issue #990
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/991

-- Commit Summary --

  * fix zstd magic

-- File Changes --

M rpmio/rpmfileutil.c (2)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/991.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/991.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/991
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Zstd magic is wrong which breaks detecting zstd files for reading (#990)

2019-12-25 Thread soig 
rpmFileIsCompressed() fails to properly detected zstd compressed files because 
of a typo

-- 
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/990___
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: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread soig 
On 2 November 2017 at 15:24, Thierry Vignaud 
wrote:

>
> On 2 November 2017 at 00:05, Igor Gnatenko 
> wrote:
>
>> This might look too magic, but what it does in short:
>>
>>- Replace /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo.. One could argue on
>>this, so we could add some macro to disable this. In Fedora it is even
>>prohibited by guidelines now. This brp would help a lot!
>>- Drop shebang from non-executable files.. Having shebangs in
>>non-executable files doesn't make sense to me. If you think I'm wrong, I'm
>>ready to listen!
>>- If shebang is empty or doesn't exist, but file is executable -
>>remove executable bit, most likely it will not work anyway, only by luck
>>- Error out on shebangs like #!perl, this works only by luck
>>
>> cc @jasontibbitts  @Conan-Kudo
>> 
>>
>> —
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> ,
>> or mute the thread
>> 
>> .
>>
> ​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the
> auto requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo"
> There's other patches in order to emit requires on packages instead of
> file deps:
> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/
> SPECS/rpm.spec?revision=1173947=markup#l155
>
> ​The patch:
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SOURCES/script-env.diff?revision=870745=markup
​


-- 
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/344#issuecomment-341464346___
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: add brp-mangle-shebangs (#344)

2017-11-02 Thread soig 
On 2 November 2017 at 00:05, Igor Gnatenko  wrote:

> This might look too magic, but what it does in short:
>
>- Replace /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo.. One could argue on
>this, so we could add some macro to disable this. In Fedora it is even
>prohibited by guidelines now. This brp would help a lot!
>- Drop shebang from non-executable files.. Having shebangs in
>non-executable files doesn't make sense to me. If you think I'm wrong, I'm
>ready to listen!
>- If shebang is empty or doesn't exist, but file is executable -
>remove executable bit, most likely it will not work anyway, only by luck
>- Error out on shebangs like #!perl, this works only by luck
>
> cc @jasontibbitts  @Conan-Kudo
> 
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or mute the thread
> 
> .
>
​In Mageia, this is done differently: the shebang is left as it, but the
auto requires is translated from "/bin/env" to "/bin/foo"
There's other patches in order to emit requires on packages instead of file
deps:
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SPECS/rpm.spec?revision=1173947=markup#l155


-- 
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/344#issuecomment-341437574___
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: show command which is executed for dependency generator in debug mode (#338)

2017-10-24 Thread soig 
On 23 October 2017 at 15:33, Igor Gnatenko  wrote:

> Currently I don't see way how to debug rpm dependency generators..
> Something just happens silently and might be broken in some way and there
> is no way of finding out what's going on.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or mute the
> thread
> 
> .
>
​+1
"​find BUILDROOT/bin -type f|xargs strace -e process -f
/usr/lib/rpm/rpmdeps -R" is a very poor workaround...
Having debugging options add to rpmdeps that could be called by rpmbuild's
verbose/debug options would be nice


-- 
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/338#issuecomment-338904887___
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 brp helper scripts from mandriva's spec-helper (#122)

2017-02-24 Thread soig 
On 24 February 2017 at 11:32, Panu Matilainen 
wrote:

> I've nothing against adding more brp-scripts as such, I haven't looked at
> this in any detail but there seems to be useful stuff in there.
>
> Enabling such a big pile of new stuff by default is a wholly different
> question, but lets not get hung up on that. The other complaint wrt
> enablement is that "dont" as a disabler doesn't sound right, "brp" stands
> for build root policy and enable/disable seem more fitting terminology for
> that. On a related note, whatever the means of enabling and disabling these
> policies ends up being, it needs to cover the pre-existing policies too,
> but that's beyond the scope of this PR. Neither of these issues prevents
> getting the scripts themselves in.
>
> I do have some issues with the script names, they're fairly hodge-podgey
> and not very descriptive in places. Not that the ones currently upstream
> truly follow any defined pattern but lets not make that situation worse.
>
> On a related note, looking at this many brp-scripts at once makes it
> painfully obvious how stupid the whole mechanism is. Every script repeats
> the same work over and over again, so we end up checking for buildroot and
> running find after find after find. I'd think all this could be coupled
> with the file classifier: eg the file classifier already knows if there are
> ELF files in the buildroot, and we could use that info to only run
> ELF-related brp-scripts when actually needed. Etc.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or mute the thread
> 
> .
>

​Which reminds me (on a similar note) that we should really make​ the "new
dependency generator" faster by making it able to call the commands listed
in .attr file once for all files (could be an extra flag but I'm pretty
sure all default scripts are OK b/c of history (compatibility with old
dependency generator))


-- 
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/122#issuecomment-282363165___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm2cpio and rpm2archive: don't write archive data to a terminal. (#116)

2017-01-07 Thread soig 
On 6 January 2017 at 05:11, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) 
wrote:

> *@Conan-Kudo* approved this pull request.
>
> Looks fantastic to me!
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> ,
> or mute the thread
> 
> .
>
​+1
This often annoyed me too​ but I never bothered trying to fixing it.
So thanks!


-- 
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/116#issuecomment-271085180___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support optionally creating backup files with %autopatch or %autosetup (#110)

2016-12-18 Thread soig 
%autosetup + SCM is quite a lot better IMHO...

Also, Mageia as the primary (only?) rpm.org  user and %apply_patch
user is switching away from %apply_patch towards %auto(setup|patch)
and all packagers are happy with no backup at all or using SCM so I
don't know why "The legacy Mandriva %apply_patches macro generated
backup files" is brough up

My 2 cents

On 18 December 2016 at 14:19, Igor Gnatenko  wrote:
>
> @ignatenkobrain approved this pull request.
>
> LGTM
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.


-- 
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/110#issuecomment-267831649___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by def… (#109)

2016-12-09 Thread soig 
On 9 December 2016 at 15:41, Igor Gnatenko <notificati...@github.com> wrote:

> @soig <https://github.com/soig> Fully agree, saw same problem in Fedora
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/109#issuecomment-266029269>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5qkUfifa1UxeE6P_T-W0K6djT4QaQeks5rGWiwgaJpZM4LIiHk>
> .
>
​And here's a scary example where backup files made os-prober do stupid and
dangerous things:
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9832​


-- 
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/109#issuecomment-266029995___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by def… (#109)

2016-12-09 Thread soig 
On 9 December 2016 at 04:03, proyvind  wrote:

> …ault
>
> The legacy mandriva %apply_patches macro by default generated backup
> files with unique suffixes by default, the suffix for patch0 being
> .0001~ etc.
>
> As for those of us still using gendiff, this is still convenient, while
> for those using a scm, the '~' at end of suffix will anyways be
> automatically ignored, so enabling it by default won't interfer.
>
> A -B argument passed to the %autopatch will disable this.
> --
> You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
>
>   https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/109
> Commit Summary
>
>- When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by
>default
>
> File Changes
>
>- *M* macros.in
>
>(10)
>
> Patch Links:
>
>- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/109.patch
>- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/109.diff
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or mute the
> thread
> 
> .
>

​
Actually, in Mageia where we used extensively %apply_patches as the
mandriva legacy, we found out taht the backup behaviour not pleasant as
this makes several packages to silently package backup files
If one really wants backups, (s)he just has to use "%autosetup -S git" and
the like

​See eg: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15579

I remember having seen other strange and rare build issues due to backup
files, so please no, we don't want backup by default and since we've great
support for SCMs, there's no point in having such an option.
My 2 cents


-- 
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/109#issuecomment-266028997___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: Support detecting gpg2 for %__gpg and prefer gpg2 (#101)

2016-11-22 Thread soig 
err, actually that's only a couple of weeks it's done in Mageia...

On 22 November 2016 at 15:26, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ)  wrote:

> For a number of years, various Linux distributions (notably Fedora and
> Mageia) have been overriding this to set it to use gnupg2, with no ill
> effects. Now that most distributions are switching to gnupg2 by default, we
> will, too.
> --
> You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
>
>   https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101
> Commit Summary
>
>- configure.ac: Support detecting gpg2 for %__gpg and prefer gpg2
>
> File Changes
>
>- *M* configure.ac
>
>(2)
>
> Patch Links:
>
>- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101.patch
>- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101.diff
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> , or mute the
> thread
> 
> .
>


-- 
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/101#issuecomment-262309511___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Pythoneggs cleanups (#46)

2016-01-17 Thread soig 
On 17 January 2016 at 20:11, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) <notificati...@github.com>
wrote:

> @soig <https://github.com/soig> Could you please check to see if these
> would apply to #35
> <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35>? I've done some
> refactoring there and I'd be happy to take in any changes authored by you
> to my pull request. I've also added compatibility for your
> pythoneggs(X)(M) format in Mageia there. I will happily accept PRs and
> patches to my branch: https://github.com/Conan-Kudo/rpm/tree/pydepgen
> (which will automatically be added to #35
> <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35>).
>
​I would do the reverse: first committing obvious changes then committing
those who needs discussion​


---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46#issuecomment-172374295___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Pythoneggs cleanups (#46)

2016-01-16 Thread soig 
This clean up pythonegg and make it usable.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46

-- Commit Summary --

  * plug pythoneggs deps in internal deps generator
  * do not call typelib deps generator
  * kill now useless --buildroot option
  * kill now unused is_exe()
  * kill unimplemented -O option

-- File Changes --

A fileattrs/pythoneggs.attr (4)
M scripts/pythoneggs.py (33)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] fix %doc with glob with some locales (#45)

2016-01-16 Thread soig 
Some spec files fail to build under some locales, when %doc is used with glob.
eg:

%build
touch author AUTHORS Ch cha
%files
%doc [A-Z]*

Which results in:

LANG=fr LC_COLLATE=fr LC_ALL=fr rpmbuild -ba SPECS/null.spec
(...)
error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/share/doc/null/cha
   /usr/share/doc/null/debugfiles.list
   /usr/share/doc/null/debuglinks.list
   /usr/share/doc/null/debugsources.list

RPM build errors:
Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/share/doc/null/cha
   /usr/share/doc/null/debugfiles.list
   /usr/share/doc/null/debuglinks.list
   /usr/share/doc/null/debugsources.list

Which is obviously not expected...
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/45

-- Commit Summary --

  * fix %doc with glob with some locales

-- File Changes --

M build/files.c (1)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/45.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/45.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/45
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Doc (#48)

2016-01-16 Thread soig 
This updates doxygen doc so that it's more useful.
It also update a man page and get rid of an old file.
Last but not least, it updates Breton translations
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/48

-- Commit Summary --

  * hint where to look for history
  * kill 14 years old useless stuff
  * typo fix
  * add text on main page
  * add short summaries to modules
  * include rpmcallback, rpmsign & rpmvf in generated doc
  * add short summaries to headers that miss one
  * first attempt at regrouping modules
  * mention --rpmfcdebug in man pages
  * unfuzzy

-- File Changes --

M CHANGES (3)
D GROUPS (29)
M Makefile.am (2)
M cliutils.h (5)
M doc/librpm/Doxyheader (119)
M doc/rpmbuild.8 (4)
M doc/rpmdeps.8 (2)
M lib/rpmcallback.h (6)
M lib/rpmcli.h (2)
M lib/rpmlegacy.h (5)
M lib/rpmtag.h (6)
M lib/rpmtd.h (6)
M lib/rpmvf.h (2)
M po/br.po (32)
M rpmio/argv.h (2)
M rpmio/rpmio.h (1)
M rpmio/rpmkeyring.h (2)
M rpmio/rpmmacro.h (2)
M rpmio/rpmsq.h (1)
M rpmio/rpmstrpool.h (7)
M rpmio/rpmsw.h (2)
M rpmio/rpmurl.h (2)
M rpmio/rpmutil.h (3)
M sign/rpmsign.h (5)
M system.h (2)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/48.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/48.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/48
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Ft2 (#43)

2016-01-10 Thread soig 
fix file triggers

which are otherwise broken when using a chroot (which is the case of a DVD 
installer such as DrakX or Anaconda, or when using urpmi with either --root or 
--urpmi-root option)
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/43

-- Commit Summary --

  * (runImmedFileTriggersInChroot) introduce it
  * fix %transfiletrigger[iu]n file triggers
  * fix transaction filetriggers in other package(s)

-- File Changes --

M lib/psm.c (4)
M lib/rpmtriggers.c (15)
M lib/rpmtriggers.h (16)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/43.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/43.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/43
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rpm 4.13.x (#41)

2016-01-10 Thread soig 
fixes file triggers

which are otherwise broken when using a chroot (which is the case of a DVD 
installer such as DrakX or Anaconda, or when using urpmi with either --root or 
--urpmi-root option)
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/41

-- Commit Summary --

  * Fix file signatures not installing
  * Fix file signatures issue with sig header size changes
  * Add rpmdsIsRich() function to replace RPMSENSE_RICH
  * Choose syntax for rich deps: if, else, and, or
  * Remove RPMSENSE_RICH and replace its use with rpmdsIsRich()
  * Fix doc strings and though doxygen warnings
  * Update translations from Transifex
  * Preparing for rpm 4.13.0-rc1
  * Add "-O" to %make_build

-- File Changes --

M build/pack.c (2)
M build/parseReqs.c (2)
M configure.ac (2)
M lib/depends.c (4)
M lib/order.c (2)
M lib/rpmds.c (30)
M lib/rpmds.h (11)
M lib/rpmfiles.h (2)
M lib/tagexts.c (2)
M macros.in (2)
M plugins/ima.c (9)
M po/ar.po (369)
M po/bn_IN.po (441)
M po/br.po (388)
M po/ca.po (1122)
M po/cmn.po (456)
M po/cs.po (392)
M po/cs_CZ.po (441)
M po/da.po (390)
M po/de.po (1102)
M po/el.po (349)
M po/eo.po (457)
M po/es.po (468)
M po/fi.po (0)
I po/fr.po (0)
I po/gu.po (0)
I po/id.po (0)
I po/is.po (0)
I po/it.po (0)
I po/ja.po (0)
I po/ko.po (0)
I po/ms.po (0)
I po/nb.po (0)
I po/nl.po (0)
I po/pl.po (0)
I po/pt.po (0)
I po/pt_BR.po (0)
I po/rpm.pot (0)
I po/ru.po (0)
I po/sk.po (0)
I po/sl.po (0)
I po/sr.po (0)
I po/s...@latin.po (0)
I po/sv.po (0)
I po/te.po (0)
I po/tr.po (0)
I po/uk.po (0)
I po/vi.po (0)
I po/zh_CN.po (0)
I po/zh_TW.po (0)
I rpmio/rpmkeyring.h (0)
I sign/rpmgensig.c (0)
I sign/rpmsign.h (0)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/41.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/41.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/41
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rpm 4.13.x ft2 (#42)

2016-01-10 Thread soig 
fix file triggers

which are otherwise broken when using a chroot (which is the case of a DVD 
installer such as DrakX or Anaconda, or when using urpmi with either --root or 
--urpmi-root option)

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/42

-- Commit Summary --

  * (runImmedFileTriggersInChroot) introduce it
  * fix %transfiletrigger[iu]n file triggers
  * fix transaction filetriggers in other package(s)

-- File Changes --

M lib/psm.c (4)
M lib/rpmtriggers.c (15)
M lib/rpmtriggers.h (16)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/42.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/42.diff

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/42
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rpm 4.13.x (#41)

2016-01-10 Thread soig 
Closed #41.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/41#event-510445132___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint