Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Enhance requires with version information from the build root. (PR #2372)
Copying the commit message for the tests: These tests are not compatible with fakechroot, for two reasons. While fakechroot supports dlmopen(), it will convert relative paths to absolute paths, which prevents library path searching. The test could be run from the data directory so that the relative path's absolute path expansion was correct, and dlmopen() will succeed. However, linkmap->l_name will have the real path, not a chrooted path, and when that is passed to readlink(), fakechroot will try to expand a path that already includes the chroot prefix. So, even when the library can be loaded with dlmopen(), the symlink can't be resolved to find the path that contains the version. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1423578709 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. 8894e4873ec8ab5795aa0ec53a99d8310eff93ce Add tests for the elf dependency generator fallback version feature. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/cb8190e9b9f2795fac0e47a916ad2e1d7c7b3a8c..8894e4873ec8ab5795aa0ec53a99d8310eff93ce 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. 79e769bdf848ede042a055f9513cd56cb7226869 Exit on system failures. cb8190e9b9f2795fac0e47a916ad2e1d7c7b3a8c Add basic documentation. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/930c6e99071a0d1121604aa2c5434b09c7d96e9d..cb8190e9b9f2795fac0e47a916ad2e1d7c7b3a8c 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 v6 package format, first public draft for commenting (Discussion #2374)
Would checking that padding is zeroed be a part of this? What about banning dribbles from the signature header? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2374#discussioncomment-4908760 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 v6 package format, first public draft for commenting (Discussion #2374)
I found this from the rpm.org website on a completely different thing. Will the discussion be only held here or is it on a mailing list also? [And sorry if my questions is obvious but missed] -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2374#discussioncomment-4908418 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)
Any advice or direction for adding tests? I see libhello.so and helloexe in the testing data... libhello.so could be moved to libhello.so.0.0.1 and replaced with a symlink, after which elfdeps should provide versioned dependency information for those objects. Tests would need to be conditional on the presence of dlmopen(), but I'm not sure how that works in this framework. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-1422945052 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. 930c6e99071a0d1121604aa2c5434b09c7d96e9d Exit on system failures. -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/files/fccc4383940987f77c78ff4ade5cd692a2c4cbf3..930c6e99071a0d1121604aa2c5434b09c7d96e9d 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] Issue %patchN deprecation warning just once (PR #2388)
@kaboussi approved this pull request. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388#pullrequestreview-1289521100 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] RFE: store SBOM data in rpm headers? (Issue #2389)
I'm currently looking into generating SBOMs for container, and I wonder if someone has already pondered if we want to store SBOM data in an rpm header. Here's where I come from: SBOM generator tools like "syft" support both querying the systems package database to know what packages are installed and getting data from files present in the system. The later is needed because (at least in the container world) many files are generated by the build process. So for example, if syft sees a go binary it will extract the buildinfo from it and generate an entry for each module dependency. Those are basically cpe and purl urls. SPDX will store them as "externalRef", CycloneDX has them directly in the component data. Do we want to make it possible to have this for rpm packages as well? I.e. add one ore more tags to store component identifiers? We would need to store an array of "(type,locator)" tuples. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2389 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] Issue %patchN deprecation warning just once (PR #2388)
This is how the alternative rpmlog-native solution might look like: https://github.com/dmnks/rpm/commit/37a28123977570f4eb0a2162e2d73bd9529f95dd -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388#issuecomment-1422668146 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] Issue %patchN deprecation warning just once (PR #2388)
Avoid polluting the build log with this warning repeated as many times as there are %patchN lines. Once per build should be enough for the packager to notice (theres also a warning summary now). Basically, make the warning context-independent, meaning that it doesnt matter which line caused it (so dont even print it), we just want to warn about such usage being present in the SPEC. Suppressing duplicate log messages could be a useful feature on its own so we may eventually want to implement this in rpmlog() with something like a RPMLOG_NODUP flag (and perhaps print the number of suppressed messages in the summary, too) but until then, just keep it simple and use a static int. Rather than adding another %patch to hello2-suid.spec which is also used elsewhere in the test suite, just make a simplified clone dedicated to %patch testing. Fixes: #2383 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388 -- Commit Summary -- * Issue %patchN deprecation warning just once -- File Changes -- M build/parsePrep.c (9) A tests/data/SPECS/hello-patch.spec (22) M tests/rpmbuild.at (5) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2388 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] Header internals type cleanup (PR #2387)
@pmatilai pushed 5 commits. 3f2687353c5793a28b34e78dad6b81100a6d3324 Refactor regionSwab() to return the length through a pointer 6ece19654d4a8a8b9c780079618385d8956914b8 Refactor dataLength() to return the length through a pointer e802ee26825aef2ceb44df87f5ba8d065088e4fa Switch regionSwab() length return type to unsigned, update callers 7db5d816f593a2b832c7ae6d6dc00536a19b7dc7 Refactor strtaglen() to return the length through a pointer 239fb5493477f58365cac2e2be0eec1b6b3b5ae8 Switch the various header data length arguments to unsigned -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2387/files/c32e3ca32026cd67123691ff428fbac483763a11..239fb5493477f58365cac2e2be0eec1b6b3b5ae8 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] Header internals type cleanup (PR #2387)
*Fun* (for some idea of fun) refactoring of header internals to replace signed integers with unsigned ones in various places. This is a significant chunk of #2385, but not complete. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2387 -- Commit Summary -- * Drop unused ei2td() internal helper * Bury ei2h() inside header.c, no external users anymore * Fix some non-functional signed integer references to unsigned * Switch all header entryinfo pointers from int32_t to uint32_t * Switch header index and datalength types from int32_t to uint32_t * Switch header region index and data lengths to unsigned integers * Refactor regionSwab() to return the length through a pointer * Refactor dataLength() to return the length through a pointer * Switch regionSwab() length return type to unsigned, update callers * Refactor strtaglen() to return the length through a pointer * Switch the various header data length arguments to unsigned -- File Changes -- M lib/header.c (184) M lib/header_internal.h (35) M lib/package.c (2) M lib/query.c (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2387.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2387.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2387 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
