Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Xz support improvements (#11)
This branch has been obsoleted by #17. Please close this and review that one. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/11#issuecomment-146226805___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Ensure defines are in place in fts.c and fts.h (#28)
It's not clear that `features.h` is included when it is supposed to be, and in fact it wasn't. This should correct that. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/28 -- Commit Summary -- * Ensure features.h is included when compiling for Linux -- File Changes -- M misc/fts.c (5) M misc/fts.h (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/28.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/28.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/28 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fix fstat64 implementation conditional and define typo (#29)
So, as it turns out, pretty much all libc implementations except for legacy ones implement it as `fstat64()`, so we will use `fstat64()` unless otherwise necessary. Also, fix typo in checking for `_D_EXACT_NAMLEN` definition. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/29 -- Commit Summary -- * Fix fstat64 conditional and definition typo -- File Changes -- M misc/fts.c (8) M misc/fts.h (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/29.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/29.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/29 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Ensure defines are in place in fts.c and fts.h (#28)
Closed #28. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/28#event-463602765___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] initial embedded python interpreter support (@rpm5.org derived) (#25)
So, it seems that `%{python:}` works as expected. However, scriptlets using `-p ` complain of it being unrecognized. Switching it to `-p ` fixes that, but the scriptlets don't run, and instead fail with the following: ``` warning: %postun(hello-2.10-27.1.fc23.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 126 Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package hello Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package hello ``` I still think that it would be better to change it to be `%{python3:}`, but meh... --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/25#issuecomment-158074469___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename pythonXegg to pythonX.Ydist and read .dist-info (#33)
Per the recommendation of Nick Coghlan and Toshio Kuratomi, `pythonXegg(M)` is being renamed to `pythonX.Ydist(M)`. An option has also been added to add a `pythonXdist(M)` Provides for distributions that may prefer to have it. The option is intended for use if only one python stack per major version will be available at a given time, as unexpected results may occur if there are multiple independent Python stacks per major version available. Consequently, it will not be on by default when using the generator for generating Provides. Additionally, .egg-info data is being replaced with .dist-info data, so we need to handle that case, too. See for more details: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel%40lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SQBSAS4T25HK5YJBNBSFDD7KDQWDELL6/ You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/33 -- Commit Summary -- * Rename to pythonX.Ydist & read .dist-info -- File Changes -- R scripts/pythondistdeps.py (47) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/33.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/33.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/33 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] initial embedded python interpreter support (@rpm5.org derived) (#25)
So, I gave it another go, and while the scriptlets seem to work now, interesting issues can come up. It causes segfaults in Yum and DNF, and I suspect anything that uses bindings to talk to RPM. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/25#issuecomment-160121507___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename pythonXegg to pythonX.Ydist and read .dist-info (#33)
Closed #33. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/33#event-477067853___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, and support legacy pythoneggs()() (#35)
Per the recommendation of Nick Coghlan and Toshio Kuratomi, `pythonXegg(M)` is being renamed to `pythonX.Ydist(M)`. An option has also been added to add a `pythonXdist(M)` Provides for distributions that may prefer to have it. The option `--majorver-provides` is intended for use if only one Python stack per major version will be available at a given time, as unexpected results may occur if there are multiple independent Python stacks per major version available. Consequently, it will not be on by default when using the generator for generating Provides. Additionally, .egg-info data is being replaced with .dist-info data, so we need to handle that case, too. See for more details: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel%40lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SQBSAS4T25HK5YJBNBSFDD7KDQWDELL6/ Also, @soig brought up on rpm-maint that Mageia currently uses `pythonegg(X)(M)` (e.g. `pythonegg(3)(rpm)` for python3 rpm bindings package) in their Python packages to pull in Python dependencies and requested a way to not break Mageia. After discussing with @ffesti about it, Mageia's `pythonegg(X)(M)` will be supported by adding `--legacy` as a switch to generate legacy Provides to maintain compatibility with Mageia's existing usage and to give them a path to transition from this usage over time. This switch will also enable `pythonXdist(M)` format to allow for a transition, as the conditions for using `pythonXdist(M)` are the same as `pythonegg(X)(M)`. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35 -- Commit Summary -- * Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()() -- File Changes -- R scripts/pythondistdeps.py (58) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Unknown tag %ifdef. (#39)
It should be just `%if %{with static}`. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/39#issuecomment-168231274___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Redundant Python version macro replaced. (#38)
@ascherer Wouldn't it make more sense to split out the python macros into `macros.python`? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/38#issuecomment-168558259___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Pythoneggs cleanups (#46)
@soig Could you please check to see if these would apply to #35? I've done some refactoring there and I'd be happy to take in any changes authored by you to my pull request. I've also added compatibility for your `pythoneggs(X)(M)` format in Mageia there. I will happily accept PRs and patches to my branch: https://github.com/Conan-Kudo/rpm/tree/pydepgen (which will automatically be added to #35). --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46#issuecomment-172368079___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()(), and cleanups (#49)
This PR contains both #35 and #46 After reviewing the changes from @soig in #46, I've merged it into a new pull request, after doing some tweaking and git sorcery. This obsoletes #35 and #46. From #35 Per the recommendation of Nick Coghlan and Toshio Kuratomi, `pythonXegg(M)` is being renamed to `pythonX.Ydist(M)`. An option has also been added to add a `pythonXdist(M)` Provides for distributions that may prefer to have it. The option `--majorver-provides` is intended for use if only one Python stack per major version will be available at a given time, as unexpected results may occur if there are multiple independent Python stacks per major version available. Consequently, it will not be on by default when using the generator for generating Provides. Additionally, .egg-info data is being replaced with .dist-info data, so we need to handle that case, too. See for more details: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel%40lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SQBSAS4T25HK5YJBNBSFDD7KDQWDELL6/ Also, @soig brought up on rpm-maint that Mageia currently uses `pythonegg(X)(M)` (e.g. `pythonegg(3)(rpm)` for python3 rpm bindings package) in their Python packages to pull in Python dependencies and requested a way to not break Mageia. After discussing with @ffesti about it, Mageia's `pythonegg(X)(M)` will be supported by adding `--legacy` as a switch to generate legacy Provides to maintain compatibility with Mageia's existing usage and to give them a path to transition from this usage over time. This switch will also enable `pythonXdist(M)` format to allow for a transition, as the conditions for using `pythonXdist(M)` are the same as `pythonegg(X)(M)`. From @soig's #46 This clean up pythonegg and make it usable. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49 -- Commit Summary -- * plug pythoneggs deps in internal deps generator * do not call typelib deps generator * kill now useless --buildroot option * kill now unused is_exe() * kill unimplemented -O option * Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()() * Change pythoneggs.attr to pythondistdeps.attr -- File Changes -- A fileattrs/pythondistdeps.attr (4) R scripts/pythondistdeps.py (85) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()(), and cleanups (#49)
Major change: introduction of attr file to enable the dependency generator by default. This pull request contains @soig's attr file to enable the dependency generator by default, adapted to also read python wheel data too. Do we want to enable this dependency generator by default in RPM, or do we want to leave it as before, as an optional one that can be enabled by distros as they want it? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49#issuecomment-172375597___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, and support legacy pythoneggs()() (#35)
Closed #35. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35#event-517361915___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, and support legacy pythoneggs()() (#35)
This pull request has been superseded by #49. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/35#issuecomment-172375774___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()(), and cleanups (#49)
Closed #49. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/49#event-517363906___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()(), and cleanups (#50)
This PR contains both #35 and #46 After reviewing the changes from @soig in #46, I've merged it into a new pull request, after doing some tweaking and git sorcery. This obsoletes #35 and #46. This PR differs from #49 in that it doesn't include the attr file to enable the dependency generator by default. I believe enabling this by default will likely require more discussion. From #35 Per the recommendation of Nick Coghlan and Toshio Kuratomi, `pythonXegg(M)` is being renamed to `pythonX.Ydist(M)`. An option has also been added to add a `pythonXdist(M)` Provides for distributions that may prefer to have it. The option `--majorver-provides` is intended for use if only one Python stack per major version will be available at a given time, as unexpected results may occur if there are multiple independent Python stacks per major version available. Consequently, it will not be on by default when using the generator for generating Provides. Additionally, .egg-info data is being replaced with .dist-info data, so we need to handle that case, too. See for more details: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel%40lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SQBSAS4T25HK5YJBNBSFDD7KDQWDELL6/ Also, @soig brought up on rpm-maint that Mageia currently uses `pythonegg(X)(M)` (e.g. `pythonegg(3)(rpm)` for python3 rpm bindings package) in their Python packages to pull in Python dependencies and requested a way to not break Mageia. After discussing with @ffesti about it, Mageia's `pythonegg(X)(M)` will be supported by adding `--legacy` as a switch to generate legacy Provides to maintain compatibility with Mageia's existing usage and to give them a path to transition from this usage over time. This switch will also enable `pythonXdist(M)` format to allow for a transition, as the conditions for using `pythonXdist(M)` are the same as `pythonegg(X)(M)`. From @soig's #46 This clean up pythonegg and make it usable. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/50 -- Commit Summary -- * do not call typelib deps generator * kill now useless --buildroot option * kill now unused is_exe() * kill unimplemented -O option * Rename to pythonX.Ydist, read .dist-info, support legacy pythoneggs()() -- File Changes -- R scripts/pythondistdeps.py (85) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/50.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/50.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/50 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Pythoneggs cleanups (#46)
@soig I've reviewed your patches and merged them into mine and created a new PR. #50 has them combined. The only patch not merged in is the patch for enabling the new dependency generator by default. I believe merging in the changes would be good, but having the dependency generator enabled by default would require more discussion. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/46#issuecomment-172377418___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Support Apache Subversion as SCM in the BUILD arena. (#55)
> @@ -1120,6 +1122,23 @@ done \ > %{__patch} %{-p:-p%{-p*}} %{-q:-s}\ > %{__bzr} commit %{-q} -m %{-m*} > > +# Subversion > +%__scm_setup_svn(q)\ > +%{__svnadmin} create .svnrepos\ > +%{__svn} mkdir %{-q} -m "Create directory structure." > file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk\ > +%{__svn} checkout %{-q} file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk ./\ > +%{__svn} add %{-q} --force ./\ > +%{__svn} commit %{-q} -m "Initial import." && %{__svn} update %{-q} > + > +# Subversion 1.6 doesn't have its own command to apply patches > +#%__scm_apply_svn(qp:m:)\ Why is this still here, just commented out? Do you plan to fix it in a way that would let it pick the correct set of commands based on the SVN version or something? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/55/files#r51106944___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Permit dynamic selection of SCM. (#56)
@ascherer It doesn't look like -S is supported anymore in `%autosetup`. Does `%autosetup -S git` or something like that still work correctly? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/56#issuecomment-176122690___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Support Apache Subversion as SCM in the BUILD arena. (#55)
> @@ -1120,6 +1122,23 @@ done \ > %{__patch} %{-p:-p%{-p*}} %{-q:-s}\ > %{__bzr} commit %{-q} -m %{-m*} > > +# Subversion > +%__scm_setup_svn(q)\ > +%{__svnadmin} create .svnrepos\ > +%{__svn} mkdir %{-q} -m "Create directory structure." > file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk\ > +%{__svn} checkout %{-q} file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk ./\ > +%{__svn} add %{-q} --force ./\ > +%{__svn} commit %{-q} -m "Initial import." && %{__svn} update %{-q} > + > +# Subversion 1.6 doesn't have its own command to apply patches > +#%__scm_apply_svn(qp:m:)\ It might just be better to take out the stuff for SVN < 1.7, then. The vast majority of RPM based systems that have this macro improvement are unlikely to have older SVN binaries installed systemwide. A check in the autoconf script for SVN 1.7 or newer could probably be sufficient for this. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/55/files#r51116182___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Permit dynamic selection of SCM. (#56)
@ascherer Eck, I didn't override the macro properly to test, that's why... It's all good to me :+1: --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/56#issuecomment-176159440___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Support Apache Subversion as SCM in the BUILD arena. (#55)
> @@ -1120,6 +1122,23 @@ done \ > %{__patch} %{-p:-p%{-p*}} %{-q:-s}\ > %{__bzr} commit %{-q} -m %{-m*} > > +# Subversion > +%__scm_setup_svn(q)\ > +%{__svnadmin} create .svnrepos\ > +%{__svn} mkdir %{-q} -m "Create directory structure." > file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk\ > +%{__svn} checkout %{-q} file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk ./\ > +%{__svn} add %{-q} --force ./\ > +%{__svn} commit %{-q} -m "Initial import." && %{__svn} update %{-q} > + > +# Subversion 1.6 doesn't have its own command to apply patches > +#%__scm_apply_svn(qp:m:)\ @ascherer Do patches generated by SVN support extended operations not supported by patch (such as changing permissions, ownership, etc.) like git-am patches do? If it does, then we probably want to use `svn patch`. If not, then I'd be okay with using standard `patch` instead. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/55/files#r51117414___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Support Apache Subversion as SCM in the BUILD arena. (#55)
> @@ -1120,6 +1122,23 @@ done \ > %{__patch} %{-p:-p%{-p*}} %{-q:-s}\ > %{__bzr} commit %{-q} -m %{-m*} > > +# Subversion > +%__scm_setup_svn(q)\ > +%{__svnadmin} create .svnrepos\ > +%{__svn} mkdir %{-q} -m "Create directory structure." > file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk\ > +%{__svn} checkout %{-q} file://`pwd`/.svnrepos/trunk ./\ > +%{__svn} add %{-q} --force ./\ > +%{__svn} commit %{-q} -m "Initial import." && %{__svn} update %{-q} > + > +# Subversion 1.6 doesn't have its own command to apply patches > +#%__scm_apply_svn(qp:m:)\ Then we really should be relying on `svn patch`, because that ensures all the available information in a patch produced by SVN would be able to be properly applied. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/55/files#r51121051___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Doc (#48)
@cgwalters I'm not sure if I would say the Groups were a failure, unless you're willing to elaborate on why. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/48#issuecomment-176185394___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
It's totally fine to submit this as a full pull request. If necessary, the maintainers of the project can cherry pick from a pull request. It makes life easier, in my opinion, to have them all in one pull request, anyway. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57#issuecomment-180214221___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -560,6 +560,7 @@ dnl Checks for library functions. > AC_CHECK_FUNCS(putenv) > AC_CHECK_FUNCS(mempcpy) > AC_CHECK_FUNCS(fdatasync) > +AC_CHECK_DECLS(fdatasync, [], [], [#include ]) `fdatasync()` was just replaced with `fsync()` in 6151ac9a298a9fe560cf8f899dc0b0e67453446c. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52270096___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -230,9 +230,9 @@ rpmvar_DATA = > > install-exec-hook: > @rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery > - @LN_S@ ../../bin/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery > + @LN_S@ rpm $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery This is a problem here. I have no idea where "rpm" exists in this symlink creation call, since it's not forcing it to be `/bin/rpm`. When you're building and installing for OS X, is `rpm` still being installed to `/bin`? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52270194___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -86,20 +90,7 @@ char * stpncpy(char * dest, const char * src, size_t n); > #define xstrdup(_str) rstrdup((_str)) > #define _free(_ptr) rfree((_ptr)) > > -/* Retrofit glibc __progname */ > -#if defined __GLIBC__ && __GLIBC__ >= 2 > -#if __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= 1 > -#define __progname __assert_program_name > -#endif > -#define setprogname(pn) > -#else > -#define __progname program_name > -#define setprogname(pn) \ > - { if ((__progname = strrchr(pn, '/')) != NULL) __progname++; \ > -else __progname = pn;\ > - } > -#endif > -extern const char *__progname; > +#define __progname getprogname() This function is not present on Linux systems, only Solaris, BSD, and OS X. It doesn't look like you handle compatibility for Linux well with the `__progname` changes. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52270457___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -86,20 +90,7 @@ char * stpncpy(char * dest, const char * src, size_t n); > #define xstrdup(_str) rstrdup((_str)) > #define _free(_ptr) rfree((_ptr)) > > -/* Retrofit glibc __progname */ > -#if defined __GLIBC__ && __GLIBC__ >= 2 > -#if __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= 1 > -#define __progname __assert_program_name > -#endif > -#define setprogname(pn) > -#else > -#define __progname program_name > -#define setprogname(pn) \ > - { if ((__progname = strrchr(pn, '/')) != NULL) __progname++; \ > -else __progname = pn;\ > - } > -#endif > -extern const char *__progname; > +#define __progname getprogname() There was [a patch in 2013 to fix this issue](http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2013-August/003585.html), but it doesn't look like it was applied. You might want to take that and refactor it for current git master. The current way you're handling the `__progname` stuff is likely not satisfactory. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52270813___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -86,20 +90,7 @@ char * stpncpy(char * dest, const char * src, size_t n); > #define xstrdup(_str) rstrdup((_str)) > #define _free(_ptr) rfree((_ptr)) > > -/* Retrofit glibc __progname */ > -#if defined __GLIBC__ && __GLIBC__ >= 2 > -#if __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= 1 > -#define __progname __assert_program_name > -#endif > -#define setprogname(pn) > -#else > -#define __progname program_name > -#define setprogname(pn) \ > - { if ((__progname = strrchr(pn, '/')) != NULL) __progname++; \ > -else __progname = pn;\ > - } > -#endif > -extern const char *__progname; > +#define __progname getprogname() This has now been fixed by applying the patch from 2013. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52860373___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] fixes for OS X (#57)
> @@ -230,9 +230,9 @@ rpmvar_DATA = > > install-exec-hook: > @rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery > - @LN_S@ ../../bin/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery > + @LN_S@ rpm $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/rpmquery I would suggest making a new pull request that adds a configure switch for changing the behavior, with the default behavior being set to the current one, while offering the ability to switch to the alternative one (where it follows the prefix'd path). --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/57/files#r52860383___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Additional fixes for getprogname()/setprogname() on BSD systems (#58)
Looks good to me :+1: --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/58#issuecomment-184071948___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Add all the BSDs that support setprogname() and getprogname() (#59)
NetBSD and OS X aren't the only BSD derivatives with support for `setprogname()` and `getprogname()`, so this PR adds the definitions for the rest of them. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/59 -- Commit Summary -- * Add all the BSDs that support setprogname() and getprogname() -- File Changes -- M system.h (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/59.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/59.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/59 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fix symlinks for installations outside /usr/bin (#60)
@ffesti The actual problem is that `/bin/rpm` isn't valid when you install to `/usr/local`, and the symlinks unconditionally assume rpm is being installed systemwide. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/60#issuecomment-184723590___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fix symlinks for installations outside /usr/bin (#60)
@ffesti What I was suggesting is that perhaps the following might solve the problem better: ``` @rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery @LN_S@ -f $(rpmbindir)/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery @rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify @LN_S@ -f $(rpmbindir)/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify ``` --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/60#issuecomment-185752901___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fix symlinks for installations outside /usr/bin (#60)
@petere After testing the patch, it seems like it's fine to me. I'm okay with it entering as-is. :+1: --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/60#issuecomment-186955079___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fixes for building RPM with BeeCrypt (#61)
These days, normally RPM is built with NSS. However, it is desirable in some environments to use BeeCrypt as an alternative to NSS. In my case, I wanted to use BeeCrypt instead of NSS for RPM for OS X. In my quest to compile RPM for OS X, I have found a few things that needed to be fixed. The fixes are submitted as this pull request. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/61 -- Commit Summary -- * digest_beecrypt: Use correct header locations * Properly support BeeCrypt option in build system -- File Changes -- M Makefile.am (17) M build/Makefile.am (1) M lib/Makefile.am (1) M rpm.pc.in (2) M rpmio/digest_beecrypt.c (22) M sign/Makefile.am (1) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/61.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/61.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/61 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Use fuzz settings for %autopatch/%autosetup, if set (#63)
In the `%apply_patches` that inspired `%autopatch`, patch application respects the fuzz settings that are used for `%patch`. `%autopatch` and `%autosetup` weren't using this, which led to an inconsistent patch application behavior. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/63 -- Commit Summary -- * Use fuzz settings for %autopatch/%autosetup, if set -- File Changes -- M macros.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/63.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/63.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/63 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm] Use fuzz settings for %autopatch/%autosetup (#63)
If it's okay, could this also be applied to the rpm 4.13 branch? It's biting us hard in Mageia, and it'd be nice if this patch was included in the released rpm 4.13. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/63#issuecomment-195956195___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Fix pkgconfig reference to Lua in Libs.private (#64)
The reference in `rpm.pc.in` is invalid and never gets filled in. By changing it to the correct reference for `configure.ac` substitution, it should work as expected. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/64 -- Commit Summary -- * Fix pkgconfig reference to Lua in Libs.private -- File Changes -- M rpm.pc.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/64.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/64.diff --- 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/64 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm] Add x86_64 for Darwin in rpmrc, enabling x86_64 target (#65)
This pull request adds support for x86_64 for Darwin (Mac OS X) and adjusts the logic slightly so that in the event an architecture is not defined, it throws a warning. Depending on how the architecture is set up, RPM may or may not properly detect it, which is why this is a warning instead of an error. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/65 -- Commit Summary -- * rpmrc: Add support for x86_64 for Darwin, and warn for undefined arches -- File Changes -- M lib/rpmrc.c (8) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/65.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/65.diff --- 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/65 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] implement rpmbuild --changelog=FILE support (#69)
@proyvind Could the changelog be merged into the spec in an SRPM build or something? Otherwise, there would need to be a way to declare that a particular source in the spec provides the changelog. --- 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/69#issuecomment-223688983___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] implement rpmbuild --changelog=FILE support (#69)
@proyvind This current approach means that you should probably have a "ChangelogFile" or some similar property that can be used in the preamble to override the default file name (but not the path). --- 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/69#issuecomment-224778914___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix preun scriptlet failure not aborting rpm erase (#74)
Looks good to me as well, just a matter of @ffesti or @lkardos doing the final review to pull it in. --- 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/74#issuecomment-231450546___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmplugin: don't mix tabs and spaces (#76)
Looks good to me! 👍 @ffesti @lkardos: I think this is sufficiently trivial that it can go straight in... --- 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/76#issuecomment-237423420___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] let debuginfo packages provide the build-id (#77)
Looks good to me! 👍 --- 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/77#issuecomment-237423581___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: use LIBDW always conditionally (#78)
@ffesti With this patch, I can build RPM on OS X again, so I'm happy with it. --- 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/78#issuecomment-238846977___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] pythondistdeps.py: Ensure that dist data used has py_version data (#80)
Reference: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368673 Reported-and-tested-by: Igor Gnatenko You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/80 -- Commit Summary -- * pythondistdeps.py: Ensure that dist data used has py_version data -- File Changes -- M scripts/pythondistdeps.py (3) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/80.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/80.diff -- 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/80 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] build: fgetc returns int, not char. (#82)
Looks excellent to me! 👍 -- 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/82#issuecomment-241387139___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] couple of fixes for pythondistdeps.py (#83)
👍 -- 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/83#issuecomment-241410563___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] pythondistdeps.py: Add --majorver-only dependency switch (#84)
Tomas Orsava from the Fedora Python SIG requested that the dependency generator support only using `pythonXdist(M)` format for both Provides and Requires, so now this capability exists. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/84 -- Commit Summary -- * pythondistdeps.py: Add --majorver-only dependency switch -- File Changes -- M scripts/pythondistdeps.py (19) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/84.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/84.diff -- 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/84 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] macros: make rpmsig's gpg command alterable (#85)
Looks good to me 👍 -- 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/85#issuecomment-244376171___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improvements for xz support (#17)
@ffesti @ignatenkobrain Anyone have a chance to re-review after the rebase? -- 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/17#issuecomment-245400085___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Improvements for xz support (#17)
Looks good to me! 👍 @ffesti What do you think? -- 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/17#issuecomment-245801457___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove extra dependencies (#86)
@legionus I'd prefer to see a more detailed description in the commit itself for future reference. Otherwise, looks good to me! What do you think, @ffesti? -- 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/86#issuecomment-246020843___ 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 support for sorting '+' higher than base version (#88)
> @@ -45,6 +45,20 @@ int rpmvercmp(const char * a, const char * b) > continue; > } > > + /* > + * Handle plus separator. Concept is same as tilde, but it one of > + * strings ends, it's considered as lower version. Shouldn't this read "it's considered as higher version"? -- 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/88/files/b06d2736c0acea4d5f059239ce830428d2a324b9#r78277889___ 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 support for sorting '+' higher than base version (#88)
Looks good to me! :+1: -- 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/88#issuecomment-246129793___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove extra dependencies (#86)
Looks great to me! :+1: @ffesti @ignatenkobrain: What do you think? Can it be merged now? -- 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/86#issuecomment-246134715___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Makefile.maint: use git-rev-list (#89)
👍 -- 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/89#issuecomment-246203644___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Couple fixes in rpmdb (double free, and rpmdbCheckTerminate return code) (#92)
Looks good to me as well. :+1: -- 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/92#issuecomment-248166812___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Couple fixes in rpmdb (double free, and rpmdbCheckTerminate return code) (#92)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks good to me as well. :+1: -- 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/92#pullrequestreview-662858___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Extend %changelog to support full timestamps (#903) (#93)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks good to me. -- 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/93#pullrequestreview-3137787___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm2archive: return EXIT_SUCCESS on successful processing of package (#94)
This PR changes `rpm2archive` so that in the event `RPMERR_ITER_END` is returned back from `process_package()`, it will consider it successful and return `EXIT_SUCCESS`. Thus, shell scripts will be able to use rpm2archive the same way as most tools. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/94 -- Commit Summary -- * rpm2archive: return EXIT_SUCCESS on successful processing of package -- File Changes -- M rpm2archive.c (10) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/94.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/94.diff -- 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/94 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Extend %changelog to support full timestamps (#903) (#93)
@pavlinamv Would it be possible to support the date+time format where the year comes before the time? It's rather strange to see the year mentioned after the time. For example, your example date would be structured as: Mon Jan 6 2016 09:02:22 CEST -- 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/93#issuecomment-252744389___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Extend %changelog to support full timestamps (#903) (#93)
@pmatilai It would also be a pure extension of the existing changelog date stamp, as it would purely append new data in the date stamp, rather than mix it up a bit. -- 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/93#issuecomment-252825328___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Read the full date from RPM changelog (#95)
As of 57f94a582602f0353cdb17a02dc12c4461d4f32d, it's now possible to have proper changelogs with dates and times properly set. Thus, it makes sense to render this information by default. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/95 -- Commit Summary -- * Read the full date from RPM changelog -- File Changes -- M rpmpopt.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/95.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/95.diff -- 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/95 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Read the full date from RPM changelog (#95)
@ignatenkobrain The time information has always been present, according to @ffesti. It's always been set to noon UTC before now, though. I verified by manually doing the `rpm -q rpm --qf` command on Mageia Cauldron now, and saw that the time information does exist and renders correctly. -- 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/95#issuecomment-255328761___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Read the full date from RPM changelog (#95)
@ffesti I've added a new option `--changes` to do this instead of changing `--changelog`. -- 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/95#issuecomment-255330990___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Read the full date from RPM changelog (#95)
@Conan-Kudo pushed 1 commit. d2ce9a6 Add man page information for '--changes' -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/95/files/e5c217523864f4acf304a7005390ece561ae9631..d2ce9a6a76778033d0deba475969f8f2594f0ed7 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] implement rpmbuild --changelog=FILE support (#69)
@proyvind The most simple case would be for SUSE, who uses `%{name}.changes` for their changelog file name, though it's not currently in the correct form for RPM changelogs (that can easily change, though). But there may be other reasons (such as reusing changelog file or using a generated `chlog` file). -- 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/69#issuecomment-256004379___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] python: remove redundant suffix in python module name in metadata (#97)
No one is quite sure why there's a redundant `-python` suffix, but the module isn't named that, and typically we want the name in the metadata to be the same as the name of the module. This has no effect on Python code itself, as it doesn't change the name of the installed module used in import statements, and since we've never published to PyPi, it's not something that can be sanely referenced for 'pip' and other similar tools in a useful manner. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/97 -- Commit Summary -- * python: remove redundant suffix in python module name in metadata -- File Changes -- M python/setup.py.in (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/97.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/97.diff -- 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/97 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
These provides are specifically for packages providing AppStream files, which are either going to be `*.appdata.xml` or `*.metainfo.xml` files in `/usr/share/appdata` or `/usr/share/metainfo`. The upstream AppStream specification mandates *.metainfo.xml files installed into `/usr/share/metainfo`, but there's still a large body of legacy AppStream files installed in the legacy location. For now, let's support both under the new `appstream()` Provides. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/98 -- Commit Summary -- * appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files -- File Changes -- M fileattrs/Makefile.am (2) D fileattrs/appdata.attr (2) A fileattrs/appstream.attr (2) M scripts/Makefile.am (2) D scripts/appdata.prov (18) A scripts/appstream.prov (22) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/98.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/98.diff -- 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/98 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
@mlschroe That's not how @ximion explained it to me. He seemed to indicate that AppStream covers both aspects, and supersedes the old AppData spec. -- 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/98#issuecomment-260610019___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request. > +# +# Transform appdata/metainfo xml file into RPM appstream(filename) provides +# +# Author: Michael Schroeder +# Based on other provides scripts from RPM + +OLD_IFS="$IFS" +while read instfile ; do + case "$instfile" in + *.appdata.xml) + echo "appstream()" + echo "appstream(${instfile##*/appdata/})" + ;; + *.metainfo.xml) + echo "appstream()" + echo "appstream(${instfile##*/metainfo/})" `*.metainfo.xml` is being used for everything now. You can see this in new KDE AppStream files, and GNOME ones as well. They aren't called `*.appdata.xml` anymore. -- 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/98___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
Hmm, apparently there is a difference... https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html -- 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/98#issuecomment-260664723___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
@ximion Would `as-metainfo` work better as a name than `appstream` or `metainfo`? I want it to be clear what this actually is (a form of AppStream data). -- 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/98#issuecomment-260990291___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: correct stack protector check (#99)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks good to me! -- 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/99#pullrequestreview-8949308___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> appstream, add support for metainfo files (#98)
I think I want to just leave it as `appstream()`, as then we won't get bitten again by changes in what actually bits of AppStream are called. -- 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/98#issuecomment-261512085___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> metainfo, add support for metainfo files (#98)
@ximion I've elected to change everything to `metainfo()`, as it resembles what we did before with calling them `appdata()`. -- 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/98#issuecomment-261531171___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] appdata -> metainfo, add support for metainfo files (#98)
@mlschroe I may come back later to make the generator a little smarter, but I wanted the name/path fixed first, as I rely on it for stuff myself. -- 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/98#issuecomment-261534420___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: Support detecting gpg2 for %__gpg and prefer gpg2 (#101)
For a number of years, various Linux distributions (notably Fedora and Mageia) have been overriding this to set it to use gnupg2, with no ill effects. Now that most distributions are switching to gnupg2 by default, we will, too. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101 -- Commit Summary -- * configure.ac: Support detecting gpg2 for %__gpg and prefer gpg2 -- File Changes -- M configure.ac (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/101.diff -- 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/101 ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: Support detecting gpg2 for %__gpg and prefer gpg2 (#101)
@soig Removed the reference to Mageia, then. -- 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/101#issuecomment-262324925___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Decouple build, host, and target platforms for building RPMs for cross-compilation (#103)
Today, RPM implicitly ties the build and host+target together, meaning that every build is assumed to be a native build. However, this means that a few desirable use cases are difficult to do with RPM: * **Making packages to target a foreign architecture**: This is the main cross-compilation case. This is increasingly important for cases like bootstrapping a new architecture for a distribution (as Fedora is currently doing for MIPS and RISC-V), but also for making it easier for software developers to be able to build for a target platform that may not necessarily be a desirable host to build the software on. This is usually the case for people trying to build software for ARM SBCs (like the Raspberry Pi family, most notably, but also many of the MCUs used for the IoT space). * **Making packages to target a foreign operating system**: Another variant of the cross-compilation case, this is the case with the Fedora/Mageia MinGW toolchain. Because RPM makes this assumption, the packages have to be built as noarch and then *a lot* of behavior has to be overridden through macros in the spec file (dependency generation, debuginfo subpackage generation, etc.). This also makes it *impossible* to reuse the same spec to build both native package and MinGW subpackage variants. In many cases, the sources and patches are duplicates of the original, native one, which makes it even more wasteful. The loss of architecture information also means that it's really easy to tie things together by the platform, because that information is not encoded in the RPM itself. * **Making packages to bootstrap a foreign platform**: If, for example, I want to build RPM and packages on x86_64 Linux to build Darwin or [Minoca OS](https://gitlab.com/minoca/os) packages to build images of RPM-enabled Darwin or Minoca, that is currently very difficult, if not impossible. Technically, this is a fusion of the first two cases earlier, but it's common for things like Yocto/OpenEmbedded or other similar platforms. -- 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/issues/103___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by def… (#109)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks good to me. -- 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/109#pullrequestreview-12224386___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Metatags (#107)
I'm a bit confused. What exactly are MetaTags supposed to do? You mention comps, are these supposed to be more like [SUSE's patterns](https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/system:install:head/patterns-openSUSE/patterns-openSUSE.spec?expand=1)? I can't quite tell what this is supposed to do... -- 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/107#issuecomment-266012048___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by def… (#109)
@proyvind @soig @ignatenkobrain Maybe it'd be better if it was not on by default? -- 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/109#issuecomment-266029530___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] When using %autopatch, create backup files with .~ suffix by def… (#109)
For those looking from GitHub and the URL is being weirdly borked, here's the bug: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9832 -- 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/109#issuecomment-266032964___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support optionally creating backup files with %autopatch or %autosetup (#110)
There are plenty of people who prefer to have backup files created when applying patches, for one reason or another. In #109, @proyvind proposed it to be enabled by default. This pull request tweaks that PR so that it is *not* enabled by default, but still available by adding `-B`. In addition, the switch is also now supported in `%autosetup`. Obsoletes #109. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/110 -- Commit Summary -- * Support creating backup files with .~ suffix with %autopatch * Add support for enabling patch backups from %autosetup -- File Changes -- M macros.in (17) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/110.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/110.diff -- 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/110 ___ 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 optionally creating backup files with %autopatch or %autosetup (#110)
@soig Well, if someone wants to put themselves through the agony of using gendiff to manage patches instead of an SCM, let's give them the tools to make it less agonizing. :) -- 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/110#issuecomment-267980899___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmsign: don't create & free NULL pointer (#111)
@pmatilai Actually, it looks like that was GitHub's fault. The name of the branch looks like how GitHub names them by default. -- 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/111#issuecomment-268249701___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] find-lang.sh: Add --with-kde KF5 support (#112)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks good to me! -- 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/112#pullrequestreview-14818649___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmsign: don't create & free NULL pointer (#111)
@pmatilai Well, can you merge it and then delete the branch? -- 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/111#issuecomment-270171743___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm2cpio and rpm2archive: don't write archive data to a terminal. (#116)
Conan-Kudo approved this pull request. Looks fantastic to me! -- 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/116#pullrequestreview-15439382___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] configure.ac: reference zlib when checking libmagic (#118)
The correct change is to get the file/libmagic project to ship a file for pkg-config to use and stop relying on creaky manual tests. -- 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/118#issuecomment-271089313___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: OpenSSL/LibreSSL as an alternative to NSPR/NSS or beecrypt (#119)
I believe @sgallagher from the Fedora Modularity group also was interested in this... Snippet from `#rpm.org` conversation back in October requesting it: ``` [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:54:05 PM EDT] ffesti: I know this is going to be a controversial question, but how hard would it be to switch RPM from using Mozilla NSS to using OpenSSL instead? [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:54:42 PM EDT]well, easy [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:54:43 PM EDT] RPM is actually the only package in the current vision of the Base Runtime module in Fedora that pulls in NSS. It would be awesome if we could eliminate one of the crypto libraries. [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:54:58 PM EDT] Oh? [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:55:01 PM EDT]if someone can implement the backend in ssl [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:55:34 PM EDT] ffesti: What would that entail? [Monday, October 17, 2016] [12:56:01 PM EDT]see rpmio/digest* ``` -- 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/issues/119#issuecomment-271190080___ 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 optionally creating backup files with %autopatch or %autosetup (#110)
@pmatilai so you'd want instead a `-S patchbackup` backend instead of using `-B` at `%autosetup`/`%autopatch`? -- 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/110#issuecomment-271871045___ 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 optionally creating backup files with %autopatch or %autosetup (#110)
@pmatilai I'm tempted to not modify the default backend because of reasons mentioned by @soig and @ignatenkobrain in #109. But let me see what I can do about introducing an alternative backend that creates patch backups. -- 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/110#issuecomment-271872239___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] '#' symbol to ignore a macro statement does not valid. (#121)
Why not just replace `%` with `#`? That's what I generally do... -- 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/issues/121#issuecomment-272155908___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint