Re: [Rpm-maint] [PATCH] debugedit: Check .debug_str index is valid before use.

On 03/09/2018 04:24 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 03/07/2018 05:25 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: debugedit would blindly use an .debug_str index from the .debug_info or .debug_line sections assuming it would result in a valid string. Which would crash and burn if the DWARF data was bogus when the

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] dependencies not failing on simultaneous installation/upgrade of multiple packages (#208)

Closed #208. -- 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/208#event-1516065493___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] dependencies not failing on simultaneous installation/upgrade of multiple packages (#208)

Yeah, in this case rpm probably should have cancelled the installation of b. Problem is coming up with a policy that works everywhere. So far rpm uses a pretty simple way of deciding what to install and what to not install on error. The main target is to not get the system into an

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: run static code analysis in CI (#306)

Okay so we're not running static analysis on CI, the ticket just forgotten open -> closing. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: implement fast mode for getting EVR (#392)

Closed #392. -- 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/392#event-1516097945___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: implement fast mode for getting EVR (#392)

yup, wontfix. -- 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/392#issuecomment-372293010___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: run static code analysis in CI (#306)

Closed #306. -- 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/306#event-1516099025___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

> The neon library used to use libs.private to hide a dependence on gssapi. I > don't know what the current state of affairs is. I don't see anything in neon source tree about checking other libraries Libs.private. Can you point where you see this? If your application is using neon API you

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

The usage case was statically linking rpm (for which a strong case persists: see discussions in fedora-devel re splitting upgrade transactions to ensure that "the rpm stack" is functional dragging in library dependencies). At the time, the needed Kerberos gssapi linkage was _NOT_ included in

Re: [Rpm-maint] [PATCH] debugedit: Check .debug_str index is valid before use.

On 03/12/2018 03:27 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Panu, On Mon, 2018-03-12 at 14:07 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: Actually, this breaks a bunch of testcases: 139: rpmbuild debuginfo subpackages multiple FAILED (rpmbuild.at:973) 140: rpmbuild debuginfo subpackages multiple unique  FAILED

Re: [Rpm-maint] [PATCH] debugedit: Check .debug_str index is valid before use.

Hi Panu, On Mon, 2018-03-12 at 14:07 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > Actually, this breaks a bunch of testcases: > > 139: rpmbuild debuginfo subpackages multiple FAILED  > (rpmbuild.at:973) > 140: rpmbuild debuginfo subpackages multiple unique  FAILED  > (rpmbuild.at:1058) > 141:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

Juste checked neon source tree: ``` [tkloczko@domek neon-0.30.2]$ grep -ir libs.private configure: # pkg-config >= 0.18 will use "Libs.private" iff necessary, ChangeLog:* neon.pc.in: Reorder Libs/Libs.private to fix static linking (Alan H). ChangeLog:* neon.pc.in: Define Libs.Private; use only

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

The neon library used to use libs.private to hide a dependence on gssapi. I don't know what the current state of affairs is. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: automatic creation of langpacks subpackages (#310)

Closed #310. -- 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/310#event-1516112008___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: automatic creation of langpacks subpackages (#310)

This is just a more specific version of #329 . While the discussion here has its own merit there is no point having two tickets open. So I am closing this one. This does not imply that the use case here is not valid. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

> There are surely many dependency errors with libs.private because static > linking is rarely attempted. In distribution like Fedora, I'm not able to find even one case as none of the source trees uses {Libs,Requires}.private so this issue is nor about rarity. As you see the case which you

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

> Also, openSUSE statically links libsolv to libzypp, and libdnf statically > links libsolv in openSUSE too. There are a number of packages that are, in > fact, statically linked, and static library subpackages are provided if > shared libraries are also provided. This is an OpenSUSE problem

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

> Meanwhile you asked for a known case where libs.private is/was necessary: > statically linking rpm to neon was one such case. You mean line: `neon.pc.in:Libs.private: @NEON_LIBS@ ` ?? This line is not about use by neon Libs.private from other packages by about providing by neon.pc file with

[Rpm-maint] [PATCH 2/2] Add RPMTAG_IDENTITY

From: "Vladimir D. Seleznev" This tag represents binary package build characteristic: if two binary packages have equal RPMTAG_IDENTITY values, it means that these packages have no significant differences. One of the applications of RPMTAG_IDENTITY is reproducible build

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

>This is an OpenSUSE problem that those packages provide only static libraries >in case of those packages. In libsolv.pc libsolv.a is offered by: > `Libs: -L${libdir} -lsolv` I'm well aware of the error in their pc file and CMakeLists. That is something I'm planning on correcting. > BTW: in

[Rpm-maint] [PATCH 1/2] Add RPMTAG_AUTOINSTALLED

From: "Vladimir D. Seleznev" This tag is needed to track automatically installed packages with rpmdb. Zero value means that a package was installed manually, other values mean that the package was installed automatically as some else package dependency. This tag is