Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add new rpmExpandThisMacro() public method (#1414)

2020-10-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
> > spectool was rewritten to use RPM Python bindings, so I imagine at least it 
> > would matter for that tool.
> 
> Hardly. There's precisely _one_ rpm.expandMacro() in the entire new spectool 
> code, and that doesn't involve parametric macros or anything else advanced, 
> it's merely to expand %_sourcedir.

That's true, however, it is reasonable to assume that other programs written in 
Python would need to do this, especially as parametric macros become more 
common. RPMLint does this in some places too. _I've_ written code to use 
`rpm.expandMacro()` for personal tools too...

-- 
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/1414#issuecomment-717191415___
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 new rpmExpandThisMacro() public method (#1414)

2020-10-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai `spectool` was rewritten to use RPM Python bindings, so I imagine at 
least it would matter for that tool.

-- 
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/1414#issuecomment-716920555___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %_default_patch_fuzz not applied to %autosetup (#1405)

2020-10-20 Thread ニールゴンパ
We've been doing this since RPM 4.14 already, see 
66a6082634687e45b321a5ade9887420d5830162.

Either your version of RPM is too old, or the distribution is setting a fuzz of 
2 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/issues/1405#issuecomment-712762474___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Treat unparsable macros like undefined macros (#1400)

2020-10-14 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai That was my thought as well when I read this.  

-- 
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/1400#issuecomment-708306302___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Treat unparsable macros like undefined macros (#1400)

2020-10-14 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1400#pullrequestreview-508197639___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


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

2020-10-10 Thread ニールゴンパ
@mikhailnov I'm confused by your comment? We don't specify paths at all because 
executables and libraries can be anywhere on the filesystem...

-- 
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/1393#issuecomment-706605110___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


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

2020-10-10 Thread ニールゴンパ
This change adds `--assume-exec` option to `elfdeps` and splits up the file 
attrs for ELF executables and libraries so that libraries are not required to 
be executable.

This patch originates from SUSE Linux, but is commonly used across the Mandriva 
family as well (Mageia, OpenMandriva, ROSA).
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1393

-- Commit Summary --

  * elfdeps: Generate dependencies on non-executable shared libraries

-- File Changes --

M fileattrs/Makefile.am (2)
D fileattrs/elf.attr (4)
A fileattrs/elfexec.attr (5)
A fileattrs/elflib.attr (4)
M tools/elfdeps.c (4)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1393.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1393.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/1393
___
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 Fseek for offset > 2GiB (#1381)

2020-10-03 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1381#pullrequestreview-501564578___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Possible to make DNF create damned package-config files for every installed package? (#1371)

2020-10-01 Thread ニールゴンパ
It is not RPM's job to create `.pc` files. It is the job of your code's build 
script to do that. RPM will just be able to read pc files that are intended to 
be wrapped in an RPM and generate dependency information from 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/issues/1371#issuecomment-701865863___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] lib/rpmdb.c: include fcntl.h for O_* (#1379)

2020-09-30 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1379#pullrequestreview-499576494___
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 ambiguous diagnostics output on file triggers (RhBug:1883338) (#1376)

2020-09-30 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1376#pullrequestreview-499577267___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Upgrade FA_TOUCH to FA_CREATE if the file went away (RhBug:1872141) (#1347)

2020-09-06 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1347#pullrequestreview-483165088___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disable SSD auto-detection, mark %_minimize_writes as experimental (#1355)

2020-09-06 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1355#pullrequestreview-483165047___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Prevent automatic garbage collection in git based %autosetup macros (#1336)

2020-08-19 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1336#pullrequestreview-471049794___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Define shell to use with %() (#1334)

2020-08-19 Thread ニールゴンパ
@dmnks There were multiple pull requests to attempt to add `%{python:}` several 
years ago, unfortunately they didn't go anywhere. If we want to add this 
functionality, we should probably start from #190 (which was the last attempt 
to do this).

-- 
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/1334#issuecomment-676196608___
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 support for redundant %_filter_GLIBC_PRIVATE mechanism (#1333)

2020-08-18 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1333#pullrequestreview-469937196___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Define shell to use with %() (#1334)

2020-08-18 Thread ニールゴンパ
My understanding is that this should be tied to the `%_buildshell` macro 
already.

-- 
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/1334#issuecomment-675450997___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] OpenMP & Lua fixes for configure.ac & INSTALL (#1325)

2020-08-07 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> @@ -761,9 +778,9 @@ AC_ARG_WITH([lua], [AS_HELP_STRING([--with-lua], [build 
> with lua support])],
 
 AS_IF([test "$with_lua" != no],[
   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([LUA],
-[lua >= 5.1],
+[lua >= 5.2],

Hah, I thought we actually dropped Lua 5.2 support as well. Okay 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/1325#discussion_r466969467___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] OpenMP & Lua fixes for configure.ac & INSTALL (#1325)

2020-08-06 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.



> @@ -761,9 +778,9 @@ AC_ARG_WITH([lua], [AS_HELP_STRING([--with-lua], [build 
> with lua support])],
 
 AS_IF([test "$with_lua" != no],[
   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([LUA],
-[lua >= 5.1],
+[lua >= 5.2],

Why aren't we just bumping to Lua 5.3? That's what we _actually_ test with and 
our current compatibility base is with.

-- 
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/1325#pullrequestreview-462988129___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Docs: Revamp BUILD OPTIONS section in rpmbuild(8) (#1318)

2020-07-29 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1318#pullrequestreview-457471065___
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 threading for zstd compression. (#1303)

2020-07-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1303#pullrequestreview-455363907___
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 threading for zstd compression. (#1303)

2020-07-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ package or when debugging this package.\
 #  "w9.gzdio"  gzip level 9 (default).
 #  "w9.bzdio"  bzip2 level 9.
 #  "w6.xzdio"  xz level 6, xz's default.
-#  "w7T16.xzdio"   xz level 7 using 16 thread (xz only)
+#  "w7T16.xzdio"   xz level 7 using 16 thread (xz and zstd only)

`zstd` would use `w7T16.zstdio`, so it needs its own line.

-- 
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/1303#discussion_r460520945___
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 threading for zstd compression. (#1303)

2020-07-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.



> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ package or when debugging this package.\
 #  "w9.gzdio"  gzip level 9 (default).
 #  "w9.bzdio"  bzip2 level 9.
 #  "w6.xzdio"  xz level 6, xz's default.
-#  "w7T16.xzdio"   xz level 7 using 16 thread (xz only)
+#  "w7T16.xzdio"   xz level 7 using 16 thread (xz and zstd only)

This description is wrong. You need a new line describing this for zstd.

-- 
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/1303#pullrequestreview-455327936___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


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

2020-07-21 Thread ニールゴンパ
We should also consider _what_ the high level interface should offer. From my 
perspective, it should (at the minimum) provide ways to:

* Work with macros and spec files
* Read RPM files
* Orchestrate building RPMs
* Do simple package management actions

But to do this well, we need a design of how this would look...

-- 
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/1311#issuecomment-661793990___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Always close libelf handle (#1313)

2020-07-20 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1313#pullrequestreview-451791040___
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 compare of global array tagsByName to NULL (#1312)

2020-07-15 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1312#pullrequestreview-448856150___
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 %postbuild section / Allow dynamic sub packages (#1239)

2020-07-05 Thread ニールゴンパ
If the intent is to primarily use this to generate subpackages, we should just 
call this `%generate_package_definitions` or similar. Do we intend to make this 
usable for generating *any and all* spec constructs that would be useful after 
running `%prep`, `%generate_buildrequires`, `%build`, and `%install` phases?

-- 
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/1239#issuecomment-653962067___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Sync python dependency conversion with pyreq2rpm. (#1299)

2020-07-05 Thread ニールゴンパ
@hroncok Could you take a look at this to confirm? I'm not sure this makes 
sense 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/1299#issuecomment-653961549___
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: save the parsed spec in src.rpm (#1241)

2020-06-29 Thread ニールゴンパ
There was a request years ago (not sure it was tracked in rpm.org trac) for 
doing this for reproducible builds, because we want to be able to replay the 
exact build environment and settings, and the current way is incomplete.

-- 
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/1241#issuecomment-651157438___
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 python(abi) requires generator, it picked files from almost good directories (#1272)

2020-06-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
I guess given that the magic stuff hasn't worked in forever, it's fine to just 
drop it and not worry about it flaking in the future.

-- 
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/1272#issuecomment-649485037___
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 python(abi) requires generator, it picked files from almost good directories (#1272)

2020-06-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai To be clear, `%__foo_path` and `%__foo_magic` filters are a union, 
not an intersection? That's actually somewhat surprising behavior...

-- 
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/1272#issuecomment-649476810___
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 python(abi) requires generator, it picked files from almost good directories (#1272)

2020-06-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1272#pullrequestreview-437395755___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Make the "rpmbuild debuginfo -g3 .debug_macro" test an expected fail … (#1267)

2020-06-23 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai It would definitely be nice to wire up some clang testing, since 
OpenMandriva and macOS use clang as the default compiler

-- 
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/1267#issuecomment-648006790___
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 data race in packageBinaries() function (#1264)

2020-06-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
This patch is now running in OpenMandriva Cooker and seems to be working okay 
so far...

-- 
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/1264#issuecomment-647325614___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Always fail build on dependency generator failures (#1183) (#1271)

2020-06-17 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1271#pullrequestreview-432885992___
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: Add ability to run lua scripts directly (#1273)

2020-06-17 Thread ニールゴンパ
@hroncok has made interesting progress in #1215, you might want to check that.

-- 
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/1273#issuecomment-645719776___
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: add database change notification API (#1124)

2020-06-17 Thread ニールゴンパ
@cgwalters Okay, and how do non-Linux systems do this?

-- 
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/1124#issuecomment-645719125___
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 data race in packageBinaries() function (#1264)

2020-06-09 Thread ニールゴンパ
@ffesti I'd appreciate this being pulled into rpm-4.16 since this is going to 
be needed for OpenMandriva.

-- 
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/1264#issuecomment-641615329___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

2020-06-02 Thread ニールゴンパ
CMake is not required to bootstrap _openSUSE_. It is required for all other 
ones using a libsolv-based package manager. RHEL/Fedora, OpenMandriva, Photon, 
etc. require the package manager in the bootstrap cycle, so libsolv is part of 
the bootstrap, which means CMake is already there.

-- 
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/1209#issuecomment-637533869___
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: Generators for license (#1073)

2020-06-01 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pombredanne Convince @spotrh for Fedora, here it doesn't really matter. If a 
distro uses SPDX, then it'll use that, otherwise it'll use whatever standard 
they've been using.

-- 
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/1073#issuecomment-636751352___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild: Create build tree after parsing a spec file (#1235)

2020-05-30 Thread ニールゴンパ
@ignatenkobrain @pmatilai What about when `rpm -ivh package.src.rpm` is done? I 
do this all the time and I expect the directories to be created when I do this.

-- 
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/1235#issuecomment-636397733___
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: Automatic (sub)package generators (#329)

2020-05-29 Thread ニールゴンパ
Ah, I forgot that he talked about it too.

-- 
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/329#issuecomment-635976924___
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: Automatic (sub)package generators (#329)

2020-05-29 Thread ニールゴンパ
It is the thing that @ignatenkobrain and I were talking about last year, yes.

-- 
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/329#issuecomment-635972856___
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: Automatic (sub)package generators (#329)

2020-05-29 Thread ニールゴンパ
cc: @hroncok This is something we should look toward for next-gen Python 
packaging stuff.

-- 
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/329#issuecomment-635866347___
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 deprecated beecrypt and NSS crypto backends (#1245)

2020-05-28 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.



> @@ -14,24 +14,13 @@ The source for the file utility + library is available 
> from
 ftp://ftp.astron.com/pub/file/
 
 You will need a cryptographic library to support digests and signatures.
-This library may be libgcrypt, Mozilla NSS, OpenSSL or beecrypt.
+This library may be libgcrypt, Mozilla NSS or OpenSSL.

This should be `libgcrypt or OpenSSL`, ne?

-- 
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/1245#pullrequestreview-420463401___
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 deprecated beecrypt and NSS crypto backends (#1245)

2020-05-28 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1245#pullrequestreview-420462821___
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 deprecated beecrypt and NSS crypto backends (#1245)

2020-05-28 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai Come on, drop BDB! Go for the gold! 磊 

-- 
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/1245#issuecomment-635586247___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-05-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
If the tests devolved to just using python's built-in unittest fixtures and 
autotest managed that, would that work? No extra deps in that case.

-- 
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/1195#issuecomment-633965648___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-05-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai So a couple of things here:

1. I don't really agree with the idea that pythondistdeps' primary development 
is in Fedora's `python-rpm-generators` (I never wanted it split out of rpm in 
the first place, but as I don't control its fate in Fedora, it happened despite 
my objections). I still consider the code in rpm to be the canonical version. 
That said, the Fedora Python SIG works from their downstream version _first_ 
and pushes it back up. That's not really different from when people work on 
their own packages first and push it back upstream.

2. Having tests in autotest isn't a terrible problem, except for I don't really 
if anyone really knows how to use autotest. I know it's the framework autotools 
has for it, but how do we test Python code 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/1195#issuecomment-633909127___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-05-20 Thread ニールゴンパ
I'd like to see this merged.

-- 
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/1195#issuecomment-631572506___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFC: Removing unneeded internal macros (such as %__ranlib) (#1211)

2020-05-11 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai I think @pterjan might know for Mageia. You might be stuck just doing 
`svn co svn://svn.mageia.org/packages/cauldron` for that. For openSUSE, 
@bmwiedemann has a Git mirror of the specs from OBS here: 
https://github.com/bmwiedemann/openSUSE

-- 
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1211#issuecomment-626635177___
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: Automatic (sub)package generators (#329)

2020-05-10 Thread ニールゴンパ
@ignatenkobrain: Unlike the Go stuff, the fonts Lua macros are considerably 
simpler to understand, just there's a lot of functions.

But @nim-nim, I agree that we need this functionality natively in RPM. The 
contortions that openSUSE goes through to generate flavor subpackages for Ruby 
and Python with their `%rubygem_subpackages`/`%python_subpackages` macros 
really indicate we need this functionality built-in to RPM. That does not 
obviate the need for macros to manage this behavior, but it does mean that we'd 
have better primitives for managing this.

-- 
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/329#issuecomment-626316771___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

2020-05-09 Thread ニールゴンパ
In general, I consider Python to be not as problematic of a base dependency as 
the dependencies for autotools, which are the following:

* bash
* m4
* perl (!!!)
* help2man
* make
* texinfo (!!!)

Now of course, most of this is hidden from you because autotools output is 
stored in source tarballs released by projects (including rpm). In _that_ 
scenario, you just need POSIX shell, make, and libtool.

That said, if people _really_ think Python is a problem, I'm all in favor of 
CMake here. The rest of the package manager stack maintained in this 
organization uses it. Heck, openSUSE's Zypper uses it! Debian's apt uses it too 
(they switched from their crazy half autotools half plain make system to CMake 
~3 years ago).

The ergonomics of CMake are well-known at this point (thanks to KDE and 
friends) and it's relatively trivial to bootstrap for builds. The portability 
of CMake is so much better than Autotools as well. CMake is also highly well 
supported in IDEs and text editors on all major platforms and several minor 
ones.

-- 
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/1209#issuecomment-626266937___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

2020-05-08 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai Well this is really a downer...

I was considering doing a CMake port for the rpm build scripts for similar 
reasons to @ignatenkobrain's to Meson. But if you're going to say that no work 
is going to be accepted ever, then that means my suffering for trying to 
bootstrap autotools on macOS every time I need to set up builds of rpm is not 
meaningful to you either.

Between CMake or Meson, I would slightly prefer CMake, but both are orders of 
magnitude easier to deal with than Autotools on macOS.

(As for @mlschroe's point about build cycles... Sorry, you're going to have to 
get over that pretty soon. util-linux is changing over, as are several other 
core projects.)

-- 
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/1209#issuecomment-625797509___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

2020-05-08 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai Well this is really a downer...

I was considering doing a CMake port for the rpm build scripts for similar 
reasons to @ignatenkobrain's to Meson. But if you're going to say that _no_ 
work is going to be accepted ever, then that means my suffering for trying to 
bootstrap autotools on macOS every time I need to set up builds of rpm is not 
meaningful to you either.

Between CMake or Meson, I would _slightly_ prefer Meson, but _both_ are orders 
of magnitude easier to deal with than Autotools on macOS.

(As for @mlschroe's point about build cycles... Sorry, you're going to have to 
get over that pretty soon. util-linux is changing over, as are several other 
core projects.)

-- 
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/1209#issuecomment-625797228___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
 # RPM python dependency generator, using .egg-info/.egg-link/.dist-info data
 #
 
+# Please know:
+# - Notes from an attempted rewrite from pkg_resources to importlib.metadata in
+#   2020 can be found in the message of the commit that added this line.

LGTM

-- 
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/1195#discussion_r415936789___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> +
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+"""To allow this script to be importable (and its classes/functions
+   reused), actions are performed only when run as a main script."""
+
+parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(prog=argv[0])
+group = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group(required=True)
+group.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print 
Provides')
+group.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print 
Requires')
+group.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true', help='Print 
Recommends')
+group.add_argument('-C', '--conflicts', action='store_true', help='Print 
Conflicts')
+group.add_argument('-E', '--extras', action='store_true', help='Print 
Extras')
+group_majorver = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group()
+group_majorver.add_argument('-M', '--majorver-provides', 
action='store_true', help='Print extra Provides with Python major version only')
+group_majorver.add_argument('--majorver-provides-versions', action='store',

Hmm, okay  

-- 
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/1195#discussion_r415697446___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
 # RPM python dependency generator, using .egg-info/.egg-link/.dist-info data
 #
 
+# Please know:
+# - Notes from an attempted rewrite from pkg_resources to importlib.metadata in
+#   2020 can be found in the message of the commit that added this line.

It's definitely the first. 藍 

-- 
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/1195#discussion_r415688461___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> +
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+"""To allow this script to be importable (and its classes/functions
+   reused), actions are performed only when run as a main script."""
+
+parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(prog=argv[0])
+group = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group(required=True)
+group.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print 
Provides')
+group.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print 
Requires')
+group.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true', help='Print 
Recommends')
+group.add_argument('-C', '--conflicts', action='store_true', help='Print 
Conflicts')
+group.add_argument('-E', '--extras', action='store_true', help='Print 
Extras')
+group_majorver = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group()
+group_majorver.add_argument('-M', '--majorver-provides', 
action='store_true', help='Print extra Provides with Python major version only')
+group_majorver.add_argument('--majorver-provides-versions', action='store',

I'm mostly thinking of potential field parsing bugs. I'm thinking of if people 
call it twice with two comma separated lists. I don't know if we really want to 
make that case possible...

-- 
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/1195#discussion_r415687029___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request.



> +
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+"""To allow this script to be importable (and its classes/functions
+   reused), actions are performed only when run as a main script."""
+
+parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(prog=argv[0])
+group = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group(required=True)
+group.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print 
Provides')
+group.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print 
Requires')
+group.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true', help='Print 
Recommends')
+group.add_argument('-C', '--conflicts', action='store_true', help='Print 
Conflicts')
+group.add_argument('-E', '--extras', action='store_true', help='Print 
Extras')
+group_majorver = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group()
+group_majorver.add_argument('-M', '--majorver-provides', 
action='store_true', help='Print extra Provides with Python major version only')
+group_majorver.add_argument('--majorver-provides-versions', action='store',

Do we need comma-separated entries if we use `append`? Most people would call 
it at most twice.

-- 
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/1195#discussion_r415685129___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai I wish you were right, but in practice that is not what has happened.

-- 
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/1195#issuecomment-619873262___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@hroncok Ultimately, the problem is that it not being in the rpm tarball means 
I have no hammer to get people to discover it and use it. Unfortunately, the 
only standardization point is in rpm itself. I hesitate to split it out after 
spending so much work integrating it into rpm upstream to get everyone to start 
using 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/1195#issuecomment-619864395___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] [feature-request] %{SOURCENAME$} macro (#1197)

2020-04-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
Wouldn't `%{basename:%{SOURCE0}}` do the trick?

-- 
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/1197#issuecomment-619544129___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: New test suite and various updates and fixes (#1195)

2020-04-26 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo requested changes on this pull request.



> +
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+"""To allow this script to be importable (and its classes/functions
+   reused), actions are performed only when run as a main script."""
+
+parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(prog=argv[0])
+group = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group(required=True)
+group.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print 
Provides')
+group.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print 
Requires')
+group.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true', help='Print 
Recommends')
+group.add_argument('-C', '--conflicts', action='store_true', help='Print 
Conflicts')
+group.add_argument('-E', '--extras', action='store_true', help='Print 
Extras')
+group_majorver = parser.add_mutually_exclusive_group()
+group_majorver.add_argument('-M', '--majorver-provides', 
action='store_true', help='Print extra Provides with Python major version only')
+group_majorver.add_argument('--majorver-provides-versions', action='store',

Instead of making this comma separated, can we use `append` or `extend` 
instead? It would make sense to store internally as a list. This would 
eliminate the weird formatting requirements too...

> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
 # RPM python dependency generator, using .egg-info/.egg-link/.dist-info data
 #
 
+# Please know:
+# - Notes from an attempted rewrite from pkg_resources to importlib.metadata in
+#   2020 can be found in the message of the commit that added this line.

 

-- 
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/1195#pullrequestreview-400497608___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Kick out leftover development-time assert checks from rpmal (#1194)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
臘‍♂️ 

-- 
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/1194#issuecomment-617731722___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Kick out leftover development-time assert checks from rpmal (#1194)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1194#pullrequestreview-398113127___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Kick out leftover development-time assert checks from rpmal (#1194)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai This looks okay, but... uhh, what's `rpmal`?

-- 
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/1194#issuecomment-617728328___
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: Signing packages with signify (#1193)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
While it's true RPM itself doesn't, most layers above RPM _do_, because that's 
pretty much the only way to do this. All of this stuff has consequences at 
higher levels of the stack (as I'm sure you're aware ).

Migrating from OpenPGP to PKCS#7 and PKCS#12 would make it easier for the 
ecosystem to transition from GPG to something more usable across the board.

-- 
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/1193#issuecomment-617727059___
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: Signing packages with signify (#1193)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
PKCS#7 and PKCS#12, yes. At least we're not all strapped to GPG 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/issues/1193#issuecomment-617725066___
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: Signing packages with signify (#1193)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
We might as well just use X.509 signatures like other operating systems do, 
then. At least those are better understood and implemented in more places than 
just GnuPG.

-- 
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/1193#issuecomment-617715887___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Don't check source package provides against installed conflicts (#1192)

2020-04-22 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1192#pullrequestreview-398023920___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Deprecate NSS (#1182)

2020-04-16 Thread ニールゴンパ
The NSS library often changes in ways that somehow breaks rpm,
and these days upstream does not care about consumers of NSS other
than itself. This inflicts untold amounts of suffering on users
of rpm in distributions where rpm is linked to NSS.

Now that we have a couple of good, well-supported options, there is
no reason to keep supporting NSS as an option.

So now, we are deprecating it for later removal.

As a small, additional commit, Ive added a warning for when beecrypt is 
selected, just to be slightly more in-your-face about the deprecation.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1182

-- Commit Summary --

  * Add a warning when beecrypt is selected for the crypto library
  * Deprecate NSS support

-- File Changes --

M configure.ac (4)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1182.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1182.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/1182
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Switch to argparse (#1181)

2020-04-16 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.

Someone finally did something that has been on my TODO for 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/1181#pullrequestreview-394558113___
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-4.16.0a regression in rpmbuild: "Tag takes single token only" (#1167)

2020-04-14 Thread ニールゴンパ
@soig As an aside, we really should fix that typo... `%_vendor` not being 
`mageia` bites me in a lot of surprising places... :(

-- 
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/1167#issuecomment-613490745___
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: store a copy of files maked as config in /usr/lib/rpm/config (#1178)

2020-04-14 Thread ニールゴンパ
So this sounds like the beginnings of wanting to support something like debconf 
on RPM. Interesting idea...

That said, I dispute putting it in `/usr/lib/rpm/config`. The standard location 
for this stuff to exist should be in `/var/lib/rpm/config`. Basically, wherever 
the rpmdb is, that's where this should be too.

-- 
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/1178#issuecomment-613389156___
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 nss backend from rpm (#1175)

2020-04-14 Thread ニールゴンパ
At least can it be deprecated like beecrypt is?

-- 
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/1175#issuecomment-613382185___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Remove nss backend from rpm (#1175)

2020-04-10 Thread ニールゴンパ
The NSS backend for rpm is slow and painful to deal with. The NSS library often 
changes in ways that somehow breaks rpm, and these days upstream doesn't care 
about non-Firefox consumers of NSS.

Let's just drop it so that people don't have to keep suffering.

-- 
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/1175___
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: default to dist-git style per-package directories in rpmbuild (#1171)

2020-04-10 Thread ニールゴンパ
This will be somewhat problematic for both CentOS and Mageia. Both 
distributions still use the current structure. I don't mind if the default is 
switched, provided we do some smart things to handle it and make a way to 
fallback to the old way easy enough.

-- 
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/1171#issuecomment-612227206___
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: rpm without database (#1151)

2020-04-06 Thread ニールゴンパ
@lnussel If you want that, just write a post-transaction trigger to run `rpm 
--exportdb` somewhere...

-- 
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/1151#issuecomment-609743838___
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: rpm without database (#1151)

2020-04-06 Thread ニールゴンパ
> I have no insight to the other database formats so can't comment on how that 
> is handled. For setups that never modify the running system but rather either 
> prepare images or modify snapshots the transactional capabilities of rpm do 
> not matter anyways. If anything goes wrong, no new snapshot/image gets 
> produced.

But that's not even close to the common case that RPM is used for. Any feature 
added to RPM must be considered holistically useful and made relatively safe 
(within the context of RPM packaging management). Virtually everything is safe 
in the model of using installroots and snapshots, but most usage of RPM is on 
live systems, so that makes it difficult to justify this feature.

-- 
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/1151#issuecomment-609734724___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert few simple generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

2020-04-05 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1163#pullrequestreview-387841233___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Reimplement pythondeps.sh as parametric macro generators (#1153)

2020-04-04 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.

I acked this on the Fedora side, so here's the same ack on the upstream side.  



-- 
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/1153#pullrequestreview-387773505___
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: rpm without database (#1151)

2020-04-04 Thread ニールゴンパ
This would essentially make it so rpm can behave the same way dpkg does, and 
opens us to the same problems dpkg has:

* People can and will randomly manipulate files to force the package manager to 
do weird things (it's even documented in various troubleshooting guides)
* It is not possible to atomically update package information, nor provide any 
transactional qualities. This means also it's possible to have races all over 
the place, depending on filesystem and OS semantics.

I don't think it's a bad idea to provide a way to export this, but I wouldn't 
think of it as a good idea to make rpm _rely_ on it. Also, with the exception 
of ndb, pretty much all rpm backends have been externally introspectable. So 
unless you're using ndb, you're usually able to at least read the database 
without rpm.

I also don't think the binary blob "issue" is particularly compelling for the 
container case, because container images and their layers are almost entirely 
made of binary blobs. If this hasn't been optimized for already, people are not 
doing their jobs well.  

And the potential benefit of moving it back into `/var` (which, to be clear, is 
only an issue on RPM-OSTree and SUSE distributions) is negated by the fact that 
we'd _still_ need stuff in `/usr/lib/sysimage/rpm` to rely on. But we'd wind up 
with a state synchronization problem on top of it, which just makes everything 
worse.

So in the end, I'm not sure this is a good idea.

-- 
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/1151#issuecomment-609057625___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] python bindings are using system RPM instead of in-source one (#130)

2020-03-30 Thread ニールゴンパ
Without the setup.py, we don't have the egg-info data which other projects use 
to depend on the Python bindings. The Autofoo should probably just be reworked 
to call setup.py instead.

-- 
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/130#issuecomment-605949977___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Misc autofoo cleanup (#1142)

2020-03-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1142#pullrequestreview-382867337___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Move the auxiliary build tool clutter to a subdirectory (#1141)

2020-03-27 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1141#pullrequestreview-382866129___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Eliminate extra compilation step from CI (#1137)

2020-03-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1137#pullrequestreview-381147347___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump gettext version to 0.18.2 to get rid of deprecation warnings (#1138)

2020-03-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1138#pullrequestreview-381147018___
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 build when libelf is available but libdw is not (#1139)

2020-03-25 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1139#pullrequestreview-381146070___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
> Alright but I think we are maybe tracking different goals then :). I thought 
> the issue was about making `%_disable_source_fetch 0` reliable. It's what the 
> original post suggested to me.

It is about that. We don't want to operate on sources unless they've been 
validated to be good. That means no doing `%prep`, `%generate_buildrequires`, 
etc. until validated if rpm is downloading the sources.

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-603234237___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
On macOS, there is not a consistent interface for doing checksums via CLI. I'm 
unsure if AIX and other platforms would also have similar problems.

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-603219133___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
RPM does not *specifically* require GNU coreutils. And `sha256sum` and friends 
are _not_ specifically available on all platforms RPM is used on.

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-603212237___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
@voxik That is for verifying GPG signatures if they exist, and yes, it requires 
`gnupg2` as a build dependency in that scenario.

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-603171003___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Deprecate Berkeley DB backend and beecrypt support (#1129)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai Why didn't we just remove beecrypt? It's not like bdb where it has 
drastic consequences for users whether it's available or not, and with having 
libgcrypt, we don't need it 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/1129#issuecomment-603168597___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Migrate away from Zanata (#1131)

2020-03-24 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai You'll then need to sign up for something with weblate.org.

-- 
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/1131#issuecomment-603166548___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Migrate away from Zanata (#1131)

2020-03-23 Thread ニールゴンパ
@Jibec Can you help us move to the new Weblate based setup?

-- 
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/1131#issuecomment-602759191___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)

2020-03-23 Thread ニールゴンパ
@pmatilai I think you meant to do `9:0:1`, not `10:0:1`.

-- 
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/commit/d21065956aef6cdd3ab83303b4fb71039c17221b#commitcomment-37997701___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)

2020-03-23 Thread ニールゴンパ
Doesn't this bump the soname anyway?

-- 
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/commit/d21065956aef6cdd3ab83303b4fb71039c17221b#commitcomment-37997467___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-20 Thread ニールゴンパ
> @praiskup I think what @Conan-Kudo meant is (correct me if I'm wrong), that 
> if we have the hashes only in `sources` and not in the spec file, a plain 
> local `rpmbuild` can't (safely) download missing sources.

This is correct.

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-601758674___
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: read sources checksums from the SPEC file and verify them (#463)

2020-03-20 Thread ニールゴンパ
> but now thinking about this again, what is the problem with the `sources` 
> file in dist-git? It already contains checksums.

We cannot rely on this file if we want rpm to be able to auto-download sources 
with any degree of confidence.

Per the comment in the macros.in file:

```rpm-spec
#
# Should rpm try to download missing sources at build-time?
# Enabling this is dangerous as long as rpm has no means to validate
# the integrity of the download with a digest or signature.
%_disable_source_fetch 1
```

This was the rationale for my filing #1126...

-- 
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/463#issuecomment-601717189___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >