Ok, there were still some issues with quoting. Should work now and produce
proper messages.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@ffesti pushed 1 commit.
56ed63e63f18a9af1c1a1d3340dfcccd5b855e13 check-rpaths: Look for RPATH and
RUNPATH in one go
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Related: #1719
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1721
-- Commit Summary --
* Allow /usr/libexec/* rpaths
-- File Changes --
M scripts/check-rpaths-worker (2)
-- Patch Links --
Updated the comment. It seems the optimizations do indeed work from my local
testing.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Merged #1720 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/1720#event-4916667264___
Rpm-maint mailing list
A nice little WTF this one: changing the version string length affects
the manipulated offsets in the built package. The offsets were done with
the development time 4.16.90 version, but with eg 4.17.0-beta1 the
offsets are different and the test fails.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull
kernel result on koji with the current version on rawhide:
```
real13m51.517s
user8m53.216s
sys 7m34.105s
```
kernel results locally with the patch:
```
real1m10.202s
user8m19.161s
sys 5m6.297s
```
For completion I'll also try it locally without the patch.
--
You are
> Yeah, I figured this would help, but it took your message for me to see how
> to do that in an clean and easy way.
>
> Can someone test the changes, please. May be even with one of the long
> running builds like kernel.
I'm doing some local initial testing.
--
You are receiving this
There should also be a requirement that commits have detailed information in
them. PRs are ephemeral, commits are forever.
(RPM itself has changed VCSes twice, so the commit information is all we
have...)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email
Closed #1114.
--
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/1114#event-4916377188___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Closed #1511.
--
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/1511#event-4916376932___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Closed #1634.
--
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/1634#event-4916359538___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Merged #1670 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/1670#event-4916312193___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@fweimer-rh commented on this pull request.
> @@ -105,6 +104,7 @@ function check_rpath() {
allow_ORIGIN=1
for j; do
+ lower=$(echo $j | grep -o "$2" | awk '{print tolower($0)}')
I think you can use the `,,` expansion operator here:
```
$ bash -c 'echo ${0,,*}' FOO
foo
```
Merged #1718 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/1718#event-4916300904___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Merged #1716 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/1716#event-4916302958___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Yeah, I figured this would help, but it took your message for me to see how to
do that in an clean and easy way.
Can someone test the changes, please. May be even with one of the long running
builds like kernel.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
@ffesti pushed 1 commit.
a2bd159f17a11f92dadcde2a118cca59fbec8296 check-rpaths: Look for RPATH and
RUNPATH in one go
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Maybe a bug here? Or an explicit policy check? Those directories seem that they
should be allowed. Examples:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1969310
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973304
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
@DemiMarie pushed 1 commit.
2786b99aa15d8de32337410bcf37c44652f89a5d Make a bounds check easier to read
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Proposed also from the mailing list to speedup things:
-check_rpath $i "RPATH"
-check_rpath $i "RUNPATH"
+check_rpath $i "RPATH|RUNPATH"
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
The undefined behavior is not an issue on modern GCC, but the new code
is easier to read.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1718
-- Commit Summary --
* Make a bounds check easier to read
-- File Changes --
@pmatilai please let me know if you would prefer `pgpGet()` to take a different
pointer type for its argument.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
This is much cleaner than repeating the code three different places.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1717
-- Commit Summary --
* Move MPI processing into common code
-- File Changes --
M rpmio/rpmpgp.c
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1716
-- Commit Summary --
* Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.17.x branch
* Bump version to appear newer than 4.17 and begin another cycle
-- File Changes --
Some hilarious stuff in the codebase...
Thanks.
--
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/1715#issuecomment-864924580___
Merged #1715 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/1715#event-4915984319___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@weblate pushed 2 commits.
ae09facf7f18fdf349d9180ad5180f993f535bd7 Translated using Weblate (Finnish)
9a50bb11bfb1c2e3c5a032a25491da5657eb52e2 Translated using Weblate (Turkish)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
instead of recomputing it four places.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1715
-- Commit Summary --
* Use a variable for h + hlen
-- File Changes --
M rpmio/rpmpgp.c (11)
-- Patch Links --
Okay, with no further ado...
--
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/1712#issuecomment-864898859___
Rpm-maint mailing
Merged #1712 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/1712#event-4915790978___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Not quite sure how I detect those. Also we already executed `readelf` by that
point, right?
Is there a way of skipping files based on file attributes I can pass to `find`
like file name, executable bit etc?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this
See #1713
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1714
-- Commit Summary --
* Run rpath check in parallel
* Dont break readelf output at 80 characters
-- File Changes --
M scripts/check-rpaths (4)
M
I chose to make `pgpGet()` take a `size_t *` argument, mostly for consistency
with `pgpLen()`. I would be fine with a different choice, though.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@DemiMarie pushed 1 commit.
5479157acefb0dac9c454a8986b3d85df992cdf3 Use pgpGet() instead of manual bounds
checks
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
> FWIW, this is an example of a case where it's probably would've been better
> to just use a single PR for these two closely related changes, because now we
> just have a conflict instead.
Good to know, thanks!
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
> Thanks!
You’re welcome! Sorry for the poor communication earlier!
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Like noted elsewhere, I'm reluctant to change code that's been working for
years just because some paper somewhere says its undefined behavior, but when
said change actually makes code more obvious and readable, it's an entirely
different matter. The existing practice in the codebase isn't by
Merged #1710 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/1710#event-4915441065___
Rpm-maint mailing list
FWIW, this is an example of a case where it's probably would've been better to
just use a single PR for these two closely related changes, because now we just
have a conflict instead.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it
I guess it's fine. It's +30C° here and the dog is panting and drooling on my
lap so if I'm mistaken afterall, I have some excuses :sweat_smile:
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Merged #1706 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/1706#event-4915287939___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Thanks!
--
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/1704#issuecomment-864811607___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Merged #1704 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/1704#event-4915142993___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Yes, `ET_REL` files can be skipped. If you are changing the file anyway, please
also add `-W` to the `readelf` invocations, so that the output does not get
truncated.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Yeah, the script runs `readelf` for every regular file in the `$RPM_BUILD_ROOT`
- twice and in series. That's something we painstakingly avoided for all the
other brp scripts affecting the kernel (and others).
I can switch this over for parallel processing, too. But weeding out the files
that
46 matches
Mail list logo
