Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
@gordonmessmer pushed 1 commit. 2075c5ea488bb45196c89665f203cf938e63b841 Enhance requires with version information from the build root. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/0af21b5ca6137983cb0eeea60b1d874302e6f67e..2075c5ea488bb45196c89665f203cf938e63b841 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
``` $ elfdeps --requires --libtool-version-fallback /lib64/libsoup-3.0.so.0 libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) libgssapi_krb5.so.2(gssapi_krb5_2_MIT)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.6)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.8.6 libpsl.so.5()(64bit) >= 5.3.3 libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit) >= 1.0.9 libgssapi_krb5.so.2()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit) >= 14.24.1 libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ``` -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1413069597 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
@gordonmessmer pushed 1 commit. 0af21b5ca6137983cb0eeea60b1d874302e6f67e Avoid using fallback version when versioned symbols are found. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/2ec718ef2f5794c67bdfed8fd915033d472f21e5..0af21b5ca6137983cb0eeea60b1d874302e6f67e You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
If we assumed that the SHT_GNU_verneed header appeared before SHT_DYNAMIC, then when processing the latter, we could loop over the existing ei->requires and look for elements that start with the same filename, and skip the libtool version lookup if one is found. The only problem is that I don't know if that order is guaranteed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1413033732 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
``` libgssapi_krb5.so.2()(64bit) >= 2.2 libz.so.1()(64bit) >= 1.2.12 ``` Well... almost as intended. Those two are unnecessary since the libraries provide versioned symbols, and shouldn't have additional version information. I'll figure out how to detect and skip that case. In the mean time, opinions on whether the rest of the approach is acceptable are welcome. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1412903553 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support glibc-hwcaps in rpm (Discussion #2022)
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2315 -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2022#discussioncomment-4845571 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add znver1 arches with 32-bit + 64-bit variants and proper CPU detection (#1035)
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2315 -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1035#issuecomment-1412820654 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
This version seems to work as intended. It's more complex than I'd like, but still probably better than parsing the output of ldd. ``` $ elfdeps --requires --libtool-version-fallback /lib64/libsoup-3.0.so.0 libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) libgssapi_krb5.so.2(gssapi_krb5_2_MIT)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.6)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.7400.1 libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) >= 0.8.6 libpsl.so.5()(64bit) >= 5.3.3 libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit) >= 1.0.9 libgssapi_krb5.so.2()(64bit) >= 2.2 libz.so.1()(64bit) >= 1.2.12 libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit) >= 14.24.1 libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ``` -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1412712998 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
@gordonmessmer pushed 1 commit. 2ec718ef2f5794c67bdfed8fd915033d472f21e5 Run dlmopen in a child process. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/41da0a2924d11b23a3f8d34efddf2ee39f6b9204..2ec718ef2f5794c67bdfed8fd915033d472f21e5 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Query format | Values intended to be queried by tag 'epoch' not queried when invoked by tag 'evr' (Issue #2364)
It's not a matter of "sometimes printing them and sometimes not" because you're querying two different things. Querying the "epoch" is not the same as querying the "evr". Really the only argument that can be made is that for nonexistent tags, rpm-cli should print nothing instead of `(none)`, which I suppose is debatable, but backwards compatibility isn't going to be broken over something so trivial. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2364#issuecomment-1412223685 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] support for POSIX getopt() behaviour (PR #2377)
Merged #2377 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2377#event-8409648034 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] support for POSIX getopt() behaviour (PR #2377)
Sounds reasonable. Thanks for the patch! -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2377#issuecomment-1411945623 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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 with Copy on Write (PR #2378)
Quoting myself from https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1470#issuecomment-772410935: > That said, what little background processing I've managed to do on this, the > more I think this isn't a use-case we'd want to be maintaining going forward > in rpm itself. I could've sworn I made it far more explicit than this, but then maybe it was in some other context. In any case, lets at least make it clear up-front this time: this functionality is not something we want to maintain in rpm. So NAK on rpm2extents and the reflink plugin, they will need to be maintained separately. The goal of enhancing the librpm and plugin API's to make this all possible is okay, as said before. I noticed you asking about the plugin API in the discussion, sorry for not replying there. But saying "not quite what I had in mind" would require explaining how exactly to do that, and I haven't got cycles for *that*. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2378#issuecomment-1411912184 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM with Copy on Write (PR #2378)
# Description This is a refactoring of PR [#1470](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1470). The RPM CoW plugin is refactored to register as owner of payloads transcoded by `rpm2extents` as suggested in comment [#2057](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2057#discussioncomment-2897701). # How it works I defined 2 new fields of type `rpmPlugin` (with associated getters and setters) in `rpmte` structure: - [`customArchiveReader`](https://github.com/rphibel/rpm/blob/8de078508954e005ba0c974389979070cfe9431d/lib/rpmte.c#L85) - [`customFileInstaller`](https://github.com/rphibel/rpm/blob/8de078508954e005ba0c974389979070cfe9431d/lib/rpmte.c#L86) When a plugin wants to register as an archive reader for a package, it sets the field `customArchiveReader` in the [`psm_pre` ](https://github.com/rphibel/rpm/blob/8de078508954e005ba0c974389979070cfe9431d/plugins/reflink.c#L165)stage. Similarly, if it wants to register as a file installer it sets the `customFileInstaller` field. Then in [`fsm.c`](https://github.com/rphibel/rpm/blob/8de078508954e005ba0c974389979070cfe9431d/lib/fsm.c#L849), if these fields are set, archive reading, file installation is deferred to the plugin. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2378 -- Commit Summary -- * RPM with Copy on Write * RPM with Copy on Write * RPM CoW: use registration model for plugin -- File Changes -- M CMakeLists.txt (5) M build/pack.c (2) M include/rpm/rpmcli.h (10) M include/rpm/rpmlib.h (9) M include/rpm/rpmpgp.h (9) M include/rpm/rpmte.h (30) M include/rpm/rpmtypes.h (3) M lib/CMakeLists.txt (1) M lib/fsm.c (138) M lib/package.c (36) M lib/rpmchecksig.c (116) A lib/rpmextents.c (110) A lib/rpmextents_internal.h (58) M lib/rpmlead.c (43) M lib/rpmlead.h (37) M lib/rpmplugin.h (9) M lib/rpmplugins.c (50) M lib/rpmplugins.h (18) M lib/rpmte.c (31) M lib/transaction.c (29) M macros.in (1) M plugins/CMakeLists.txt (1) A plugins/reflink.c (402) A rpm2extents.c (701) M rpmio/rpmpgp.c (10) M rpmio/rpmpgp_internal.c (18) M rpmio/rpmpgpval.h (18) M scripts/CMakeLists.txt (1) A scripts/rpm2extents_dump (94) M sign/rpmgensig.c (2) M tests/CMakeLists.txt (1) M tests/atlocal.in (22) A tests/rpm2extents.at (151) M tests/rpmtests.at (1) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2378.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2378.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2378 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Query format | Values intended to be queried by tag 'epoch' not queried when invoked by tag 'evr' (Issue #2364)
So that is all what it was about; **deliberate inconsistency.** Choosing to print sometimes _epoch_ values, with tag _epoch_, and sometimes not to print them, with tags _evr_ and _nevra_, would not be expected from developers. Having such a fantasy in your code must have pleased you so far since you showed interest to keep it. After all, that makes the motive for suddenly closing enterely different, and it was indeed worth being closed as there was nothing that could have been done here in such a context. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2364#issuecomment-1411760695 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
@gordonmessmer pushed 2 commits. a01b715f68d025387ea394fa367730e30b9629a2 Enhance requires with version information from the build root. 41da0a2924d11b23a3f8d34efddf2ee39f6b9204 Resolve symlinks when gathering libtool version. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/398827f176a1482fbde837b1b997395d024ff37a..41da0a2924d11b23a3f8d34efddf2ee39f6b9204 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
@gordonmessmer pushed 1 commit. 398827f176a1482fbde837b1b997395d024ff37a Resolve symlinks when gathering libtool version. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/d0c8fc93976325c931d0a98d1c4ff73581dae8bd..398827f176a1482fbde837b1b997395d024ff37a You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
