Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
@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/1443#pullrequestreview-537021319___

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] [RFE] Subpackage for excluded files (#1448)

2020-11-23 Thread Vít Ondruch
Probably silly idea, but in the context of #1442, could we have something like "-dev-null" subpackage, where we could reference all the files, which should not be packaged? Such package would not be created at the end, or it would not be composed into distribution. Maybe event the `%exclude`

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Transaction ordering should break dependency loops at weak dependencies (if there are any) (#1346)

2020-11-23 Thread James Cassell
This seems like a rather important issue to fix... it could help eliminate lots of otherwise-unnecessary `%posttrans` and `%pretrans` scripts that exist only due to dependency-order unpredictability. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread Michael Schroeder
@mlschroe 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/1443#pullrequestreview-536621371___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread Michael Schroeder
This looks fine to me. I also disliked the automatic creation, so I'm happy if it is gone. I'll ask the libzypp folks if they need to adapt their code to accommodate for this change, but that shouldn't bother you :-) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Added a high-level wrapper. (#1311)

2020-11-23 Thread KOLANICH
@KOLANICH pushed 1 commit. 278fec730baf775462391e74f71057c8eb8128ec Added a high-level wrapper. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improved python support: enums are now enums with all additional goodies. (#1309)

2020-11-23 Thread KOLANICH
@KOLANICH pushed 1 commit. 75f8d5dbeef1f95e9a069092945fbc4c6fc01a0f Improved python support: enums are now enums with all additional goodies. Can usually be available using CamelCased prefix, class members have the prefix stripped. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
> They're not incompatible with each other, but for the purpose of addressing > the issue that libraries should not have to be packaged as executable, #1394 > kills the ability to chmod a-x to disable dependency generation for all ELF > files, whereas #1395 doesn't. > Maybe my understanding

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add a build root policy for removing executable bits from shared libr… (#1395)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Merged #1395 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/1395#event-4027884180___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add a build root policy for removing executable bits from shared libr… (#1395)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Okay, this is not in any way exclusive to other improvements in this area and quite clearly is a good thing, so guess we'll just merge this and wonder about the other stuff separately. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improve error handling in Python pubkey constructor (#1447)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Merged #1447 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/1447#event-4027795564___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
They're not incompatible with each other, but for the purpose of addressing the issue that libraries should not have to be packaged as executable, #1394 kills the ability to chmod a-x to disable dependency generation for all ELF files, whereas #1395 doesn't. But then the latter requires

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Generate requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
I think this makes sense as an independent fix, because that makes our ability to generate dependencies more reliable. -- 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] Generate requires for "pure" ELF DSO's regardless of executable bit (#1394)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
@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/1394#pullrequestreview-536465747___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improve error handling in Python pubkey constructor (#1447)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
@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/1447#pullrequestreview-536464803___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add a build root policy for removing executable bits from shared libr… (#1395)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
This is very similar to a brp script we have in OpenMandriva downstream that we execute as part of the "spec-helper" buildroot policy script. I think it makes sense to have this so that having a `noexec` library directory is possible. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add a build root policy for removing executable bits from shared libr… (#1395)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
@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/1395#pullrequestreview-536463958___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improved errors handling. (#1305)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Closed #1305. -- 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/1305#event-4027581951___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improved errors handling. (#1305)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Yup, we don't want detailed error messages from PGP parsing, otherwise the whole parser would be littered with similar messages. You're right that there's a missing check on rpmPubkeyNew() return in the Python bindings, but this would introduce a different bug: it returns NULL with no

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improve error handling in Python pubkey constructor (#1447)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
pkgParsePkts() only parses the PGP armor, the actual pubkey is only parsed as a part of rpmPubkeyNew() whose return we need to check for separately. Emit different messages in these cases. Thanks to @KOLANICH for pointing this out and initial patch. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)

2020-11-23 Thread ニール・ゴンパ
@pmatilai Is there a reason we wouldn't ship _both_ #1394 and #1395? To me, they seem like two parts of the same solution to replace this patch. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries (#1393)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
So... any thoughts between the alternatives? -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1393#issuecomment-732137826___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] debugedit: Do not 'edit_dwarf2' when just extracting build-id (#1435)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
> You last patch looks good. As per that, merging. FWIW, this appeared to have failed CI but that was due to some unrelated daily docker quota thing, manually rerunning cleared the status. Thanks for the patch! -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] debugedit: Do not 'edit_dwarf2' when just extracting build-id (#1435)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Merged #1435 into master. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1435#event-4027446524___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Really require everything in buildroot to be packaged (#1446)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Merged #1446 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/1446#event-4027412290___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
@mlschroe , any thoughts on the change itself? This is something I've wanted to do for quite a while, but there might be quite some fallout from doing so and I'm willing to listen to other opinions on the matter... -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Added some further tweaks: - we shouldn't try create a non-existent db directory in read-only mode either - fix a brainfart wrt lazy keyring load on lazy db iterator open causing double-errors for no good reason -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle (#1443)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
@pmatilai pushed 2 commits. e791e85e7e1f159113729f4a01e8e325d3299c79 Only attempt loading the keyring once the rpmdb is open 10b08df0d250c7d16d37a290b757adce7750a592 Disable implicit database creation on read-only handle -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Eliminate use of obsolete gethostbyname() function (#1428)

2020-11-23 Thread Michal Domonkos
Sorry... wanted to give a peek, but of course, didn't make a note in my todo list, so there you go... I'll check it nevertheless, as part of the BZ backport that I'm assigned to :) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild logging tweaks (#1429)

2020-11-23 Thread Michal Domonkos
> I was about to ask whether you're expecting a review on this (generally PR's > with failing tests will not be looked at), but then I noticed this is a > "draft", I didn't even know GH has such a (handy looking) feature so thanks > for the tip Yeah, it's nice. It's just the `[WIP]` prefix,

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild logging tweaks (#1429)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
I was about to ask whether you're expecting a review on this (generally PR's with failing tests will not be looked at), but then I noticed this is a "draft", I didn't even know GH has such a (handy looking) feature so thanks for the tip :smile: Since it's a work-in-progress by label, didn't

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Eliminate use of obsolete gethostbyname() function (#1428)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Merged #1428 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/1428#event-4027046940___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Eliminate use of obsolete gethostbyname() function (#1428)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
No comments, guess nobody cares... :) -- 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/1428#issuecomment-732087959___ Rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Require everything in buildroot to be packaged (#994) (#1442)

2020-11-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
There already is a configurable for this: ```# Note: The default value should be 0 for legacy compatibility. %_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 1 ``` FWIW, I remember when that check was initially introduced. There were a lot of failing packages then too :smile: The Fedora numbers indeed