Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/lib/ rpmfc.c

2011-04-16 Thread Jeff Johnson
Ok enough.

We _ARE_ headed for a fork between rpm5.org - Mandriva if these check-ins 
continue.

I've asked for discussion first. Not happening.

I've asked for a feature list. Not seen.

I've pointed out that many of these changes are ancient hysteria being
recycled as Newer! Better! Bestest!

There is noone asking for these changes. Show me.

There are no test cases. I will make that policy MANDATORY if necessary.

There is nothing but a 1-line description, essentially
Add new stuff.
No examples, no writeup, no usage case, nothing.

Its happening on the production branch (in this case) creating
divergence that I have to muck about with later, often breaking
code because I haven't any clue what is what.

None of this code is maintainable or useful imho until some of the above is 
corrected.

73 de Jeff

On Apr 16, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote:

  RPM Package Manager, CVS Repository
  http://rpm5.org/cvs/
  
 
  Server: rpm5.org Name:   Per Øyvind Karlsen
  Root:   /v/rpm/cvs   Email:  pkarl...@rpm5.org
  Module: rpm  Date:   16-Apr-2011 16:27:26
  Branch: rpm-5_3  Handle: 2011041614272600
 
  Modified files:   (Branch: rpm-5_3)
rpm/lib rpmfc.c
 
  Log:
kernel(...) dependency helper seems to have been missing from earlier
commit, really commit now (and place it under mandriva #ifdef only for
now)
 
  Summary:
RevisionChanges Path
1.73.2.8+19 -0  rpm/lib/rpmfc.c
  
 
  patch -p0 '@@ .'
  Index: rpm/lib/rpmfc.c
  
  $ cvs diff -u -r1.73.2.7 -r1.73.2.8 rpmfc.c
  --- rpm/lib/rpmfc.c  12 Apr 2011 08:02:30 -  1.73.2.7
  +++ rpm/lib/rpmfc.c  16 Apr 2011 14:27:26 -  1.73.2.8
  @@ -909,6 +909,19 @@
   xx = rpmfcHelper(fc, 'P', gstreamer);
   /* XXX: currently of no use, but for the sake of consistency... */
   xx = rpmfcHelper(fc, 'R', gstreamer);
  +#if defined(RPM_VENDOR_MANDRIVA)
  +} else
  +if ((fc-fcolor-vals[fc-ix]  RPMFC_MODULE)) {
  +miRE mire = mireNew(RPMMIRE_REGEX, RPMTAG_FILEPATHS);
  +if (!mireRegcomp(mire, 
 ^.*(/lib/modules/|/var/lib/dkms/).*\\.ko(\\.gz|\\.xz)?$))
  +if (mireRegexec(mire, fc-fn[fc-ix], (size_t) 0) = 0) {
  +fc-fcolor-vals[fc-ix] |= (RPMFC_MODULE|RPMFC_SCRIPT);
  +xx = rpmfcHelper(fc, 'P', kernel);
  +/* XXX: currently of no use, but for the sake of consistency... 
 */
  +xx = rpmfcHelper(fc, 'R', kernel);
  +}
  +mire = mireFree(mire);
  +#endif
   }
 
   /*@-observertrans@*/
  @@ -,6 +1124,12 @@
   else if (!strncmp(fn, /gstreamer, sizeof(/gstreamer)-1) 
   fc-fcolor-vals[fc-ix]  RPMFC_LIBRARY)
   fc-fcolor-vals[fc-ix] |= (RPMFC_MODULE|RPMFC_SCRIPT);
  +} else {
  +miRE mire = mireNew(RPMMIRE_REGEX, RPMTAG_FILEPATHS);
  +if (!mireRegcomp(mire, 
 ^.*(/lib/modules/|/var/lib/dkms/).*\\.ko(\\.gz|\\.xz)?$))
  +if (mireRegexec(mire, fc-fn[fc-ix], (size_t) 0) = 0)
  +fc-fcolor-vals[fc-ix] |= (RPMFC_MODULE|RPMFC_SCRIPT);
  +mire = mireFree(mire);
   }
   }
 
  @@ .
 __
 RPM Package Managerhttp://rpm5.org
 CVS Sources Repositoryrpm-...@rpm5.org



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/lib/ rpmfc.c

2011-04-16 Thread Per Øyvind Karlsen
2011/4/16 Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com:
 Ok enough.

 We _ARE_ headed for a fork between rpm5.org - Mandriva if these check-ins 
 continue.

 I've asked for discussion first. Not happening.

 I've asked for a feature list. Not seen.

 I've pointed out that many of these changes are ancient hysteria being
 recycled as Newer! Better! Bestest!

 There is noone asking for these changes. Show me.
These are already in use on Mandriva and part of the helpers migrated
from rpm-mandriva-setup.


 There are no test cases. I will make that policy MANDATORY if necessary.

 There is nothing but a 1-line description, essentially
        Add new stuff.
 No examples, no writeup, no usage case, nothing.
?
Both commit messages, entry in CHANGES and the code itself should
generally have at least the bare minimum to provide some pointers for it..

 Its happening on the production branch (in this case) creating
 divergence that I have to muck about with later, often breaking
 code because I haven't any clue what is what.
I've placed it under mandriva #ifdef, so it shouldn't break things for
anyone else on the
production branch..

 None of this code is maintainable or useful imho until some of the above is 
 corrected.
If I'm gonna be able to migrate to the internal dependency generator, I must add
these to avoid ~regressions.

If a discussion and test cases is required provided first, I won't be
able to have time to
switching to the internal dependency before after next mandriva release..

Or I can go back to maintaining patches locally in cooker svn..?

--
Regards,
Per Øyvind
__
RPM Package Managerhttp://rpm5.org
Developer Communication Listrpm-devel@rpm5.org