Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM fsverity support (#1203)
I have pushed a fix for the configure issue, and configure should fail is one specifies --with-fsverity and it isn't available. Apologies if I messed something up, autoconf/automake and I do not get along. -- 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/1203#issuecomment-643482342___ 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 fsverity support (#1203)
> Oh, sorry, I've forgot to update "status" here. > > We can't merge a patch that fails the CI tests - this fails because fsverity > is enabled in the CI but the library doesn't exist in Fedora 32. Hardly > surprising as the library version isn't even released upstream AFAICS. That > can be worked around by not enabling it in the CI, but I'm also not going to > merge a patch I've never seen compile (and I haven't gotten around to build > from upstream yet, although I did notice the library thing has been merged). > I'd prefer to see an upstream release of fsverity library before merging and > optimally, said version in Fedora >= 32 so we could enable it in CI, but I do > realize there could be other incompatibilities preventing the latter from > occurring so that can't be a hard requirement. > > Speaking of enabling it in configure, I just noticed that it doesn't actually > check for fsverity presence in configure, so if enabled but missing it'll > fail in middle of compilation instead of configure time as it should. So > there's a minor tweak that'll be needed. That is is totally fair, I was assuming that. My question was more about whether you are happy with the code as it is, while we wait for the library. we are really keen to start using it internally, so I wanted to be sure to agree on the tag numbers at least, to avoid binary incompatibilities. RPM doesn't actually need the fsverity utility to be present, but it does need libfsverity, and there is a link test for that in configure. We should also check for the presence of libfsverity.h, since that is now going into a fsverity-devel package, while the library goes into the fsverity package. The plugin only needs linux/fsverity.h since it only calls the ioctl() to enable things, and that looks to be covered. I'll look into updating configure to also check for libfsverity.h and push further for an official upstream release of fsverity-utils, so I can push it into Fedora. I have been pushing for this regularly. -- 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/1203#issuecomment-643287491___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Execute tests in independent testing roots to enable parallel running (#1268)
Merged #1268 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/1268#event-3437829804___ 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 fsverity support (#1203)
Oh, sorry, I've forgot to update "status" here. We can't merge a patch that fails the CI tests - this fails because fsverity is enabled in the CI but the library doesn't exist in Fedora 32. Hardly surprising as the library version isn't even released upstream AFAICS. That can be worked around by not enabling it in the CI, but I'm also not going to merge a patch I've never seen compile (and I haven't gotten around to build from upstream yet, although I did notice the library thing has been merged). I'd prefer to see an upstream release of fsverity library before merging and optimally, said version in Fedora >= 32 so we could enable it in CI, but I do realize there could be other incompatibilities preventing the latter from occurring so that can't be a hard requirement. Speaking of enabling it in configure, I just noticed that it doesn't actually check for fsverity presence in configure, so if enabled but missing it'll fail in middle of compilation instead of configure time as it should. So there's a minor tweak that'll be needed. -- 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/1203#issuecomment-643195027___ 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 the "rpmbuild debuginfo -g3 .debug_macro" test an expected fail … (#1267)
Okay, that's nicer. It does point out how we sorely need some infra for multiple compiler support, but that's beyond the scope of this patch of course. Thanks for the patch! -- 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/1267#issuecomment-643187196___ 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 the "rpmbuild debuginfo -g3 .debug_macro" test an expected fail … (#1267)
Merged #1267 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/1267#event-3437761737___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Execute tests in independent testing roots to enable parallel running (#1268)
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit. 997dba91426720b4b4d37aca14572c54fe12b8f9 Run CI test-suite in parallel, limit parallelism to $(nproc) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1268/files/320a7c8ae91a1cc3a8d45d40acc0a52965298463..997dba91426720b4b4d37aca14572c54fe12b8f9 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
