Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Such existing flags to pass options to a script do still work. The existing known flags are handled. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-597040432___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Will this change affect `__ocaml_requires_opts` / `__ocaml_provides_opts`? I'm trying to work out how that works - I guess RPM must do some magic for these? -- 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/1070#issuecomment-597026234___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Merged #1070 into master. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070#event-3114013687___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Lost between all the other discussion was an approval from @Conan-Kudo. I'm don't know any better, and rpm-extras isn't going to happen *now* so I guess we might just as well merge it. Thanks @olafhering for all the work, and patience. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-597002329___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@Conan-Kudo what I meant is not to release piece of junk, but start with just this OCAML generators. Once there is something else to be called "stable", release that as well. But not just random content which is there right now. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-588187212___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
At this point in time, `rpm-extras` is set up to be a dumping ground. It's _not_ set up with any kind of quality things, any process of rationalization of scripts and such. Without that, we're just going to commit stuff in there that's not even going to work. For example, the ALT Linux brp scripts committed in there don't even work _anywhere_ because they rely on files that haven't existed in RPM for _years_. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-588180741___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@ignatenkobrain This will be a crap situation to deal with in openSUSE, since it's going to be a pain to make openSUSE keep this stuff in place correctly. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-588178152___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@pmatilai if you prefer this going away to rpm-extras, I'm willing to establish releases, installation scripts, and so on and so forth. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-588177604___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Sorry about that, but full rewrite like this would be about the best time there is for such a move. So it makes sense to at least consider that option right now. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-588128969___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Will you guys please discuss and perform any separation of language support in a separate SR, please?! -- 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/1070#issuecomment-587927935___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
> Three problems with it: > > 1. It would be regressive to current functionality for no good reason. > 2. We don't have a way of distributing this in any kind of reasonable > fashion through rpm-extras. > 3. IMO, That's not what rpm-extras is for. It's for staging things to > eventually integrate into rpm tree. Negative on 3, that's exactly the other way around. Rpm itself is still carrying far too much baggage that doesn't belong in it, and these language specifics are exactly the kind of thing that we're pushing *out* of rpm. Not because they're inherently bad or anything, but because we are the worst possible keepers of that stuff, this belongs into hands of people who know and care about those languages. As for 1, that's a distro integration issue. We did similar things with 4.15 and the world didn't collapse. 2. is a legit concern wrt rpm-extras though. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070#issuecomment-586864142___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070#pullrequestreview-359353949___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@olafhering pushed 1 commit. dddabb30a808a803d00d9543f09cf201eae85102 update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070/files/9f04b41e653da201a6350b00482309d4be272519..dddabb30a808a803d00d9543f09cf201eae85102 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@olafhering pushed 1 commit. 9f04b41e653da201a6350b00482309d4be272519 update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070/files/03ff54739629181e98779202b42fba9bedbf7b7b..9f04b41e653da201a6350b00482309d4be272519 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@ignatenkobrain Three problems with it: 1. It would be regressive to current functionality for no good reason. 2. We don't have a way of distributing this in any kind of reasonable fashion through rpm-extras. 3. IMO, That's not what rpm-extras is for. It's for staging things to eventually integrate into rpm tree. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070#issuecomment-586577952___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
> @ignatenkobrain No, there's no reason to move it there. Why not? It is better to split language-specific things into a rpm-extras. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-586577191___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.
> +}
+#
+#
+usage() {
+echo >&2 "Usage: ${0##*/} -prov|-req [-f 'ocamlobjinfo cmd']"
+}
+#
+mode=
+ignore_implementation_a=()
+ignore_interface_a=()
+while test "$#" -gt 0
+do
+ : "${1}" "${2}"
+ case "${1}" in
+-prov) mode='prov' ;;
+-req) mode='req' ;;
Because people do directly run it when doing things like debugging or testing
them. And it's just _weird_ to ignore conventions for the parameterization of a
dep 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/1070#discussion_r379822480___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
@ignatenkobrain No, there's no reason to move it there. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1070#issuecomment-586574641___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
> While we are on it, shouldn't we move these to rpm-extras? That is up to you guys. But this must be a separate SR. -- 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/1070#issuecomment-586565864___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
While we are on it, shouldn't we move these to rpm-extras? -- 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/1070#issuecomment-586562823___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
olafhering commented on this pull request.
> +}
+#
+#
+usage() {
+echo >&2 "Usage: ${0##*/} -prov|-req [-f 'ocamlobjinfo cmd']"
+}
+#
+mode=
+ignore_implementation_a=()
+ignore_interface_a=()
+while test "$#" -gt 0
+do
+ : "${1}" "${2}"
+ case "${1}" in
+-prov) mode='prov' ;;
+-req) mode='req' ;;
Why? It is an internal helper, not a public interface.
--
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/1070#discussion_r379686847___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)
Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.
> +}
+#
+#
+usage() {
+echo >&2 "Usage: ${0##*/} -prov|-req [-f 'ocamlobjinfo cmd']"
+}
+#
+mode=
+ignore_implementation_a=()
+ignore_interface_a=()
+while test "$#" -gt 0
+do
+ : "${1}" "${2}"
+ case "${1}" in
+-prov) mode='prov' ;;
+-req) mode='req' ;;
Shouldn't this be something like the following?
```bash
-P|--provides) mode='prov' ;;
-R|--requires) mode='req' ;;
```
--
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/1070#pullrequestreview-359260050___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
