Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add OrderWithRequires dependency generation (#1257)

2020-06-07 Thread mikhailnov
If there is just a scriptlet which calls `systemctl preset`, in _some_ cases it may silently fail to enable a service which must be enabled. In most cases, I agree, it is not needed, but seems to be not harmful. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add OrderWithRequires dependency generation (#1257)

2020-06-07 Thread mikhailnov
But why? If a package contains a config is /usr/lib/sysusers.d/, why not to ensure that it is installed after systemd-sysusers binary is present and so the scriptlet which creates users can be executed? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add OrderWithRequires dependency generation (#1257)

2020-06-07 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> it is only some specific cases where this needs to be used. Yeah, we used to pull in systemd much more often. Nowadays, most packages should not pull in systemd, and install time ordering also doesn't matter. But that's largely irrelevant here, since systemd was only used as an example here.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add _without_check macro (#1256)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
I think this should set _with_check unless _without_check is defined already. Basically to have `%bcond_without check` by default without having to put it in all spec files. But still need to make sure that somebody defines `%bcond_without check`, this code won't override it. -- You are

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fail the build if %_build_pkgcheck_set failed (#1258)

2020-06-07 Thread mikhailnov
If %_nonzero_exit_pkgcheck_terminate_build is true, then the build fails, otherwise it does not. This regressed and the build never failed -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %transfiletriggerin does not work on Fedora 33 (#1260)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
``` ❯ sudo rpm -ivh /home/brain/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/newsflash-1.0~rc1-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm --debug --rpmfcdebug [sudo] password for brain: D: == /home/brain/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/newsflash-1.0~rc1-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm D: loading keyring from pubkeys in /var/lib/rpm/pubkeys/*.key D:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %transfiletriggerin does not work on Fedora 33 (#1260)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
Also I checked `stat /usr/share/icons/hicolor/icon-theme.cache` and that does not change during the RPM run. But if I run command from trigger manually, it updates that file. -- 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] Add OrderWithRequires dependency generation (#1257)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
> When a package contains a systemd unit, %systemd_* macros are usually used; > it is usefull to add "OrderWithRequires: systemd" in this case to ensure > that systemd is installed before that package. I think I disagree here, it is only some specific cases where this needs to be used. cc

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] metainfo.attr: Fix execution of the generator (#1259)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
Please backport to 4.16.x -- 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/1259#issuecomment-640211823___ Rpm-maint mailing list

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] metainfo.attr: Fix execution of the generator (#1259)

2020-06-07 Thread Igor Raits
Somehow it wasnt noticed before. Fixes: 9464926456125dacb8046767f1fe4235471986e9 Signed-off-by: Igor Raits i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1259 -- Commit Summary -- *

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fail the build if %_build_pkgcheck_set failed (#1258)

2020-06-07 Thread mikhailnov
RPM build did not fail if rpmlint (%_build_pkgcheck_set) failed when checking binary RPMs (it did fail correctly when rpmlint failed when checking SRPMs) Probably fixes regression introduced by 78f61f273 (Refactor package set checking out of packageBinaries()) You can view, comment on, or merge