Any package Fedora 33/rawhide build that involved installing metainfo files has
started giving error in build.log
e.g. See this scratch build
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45537932 which shows line
```error: Couldn't exec metainfo(): No such file or directory```
rpm-build-4
Sent patch yesterday https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1259
--
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/1261#issuecomment-640417518__
Okay, quite easily reproduced. Looks like our first reported bug in sqlite
:beetle:
--
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/1260#issuecomment-640420247__
May be the macro should be renamed to not collide with the with/without
mechanism. The bcond mechnism assumes that the actual value is not set as a
macro but only on the command line and is basically read only within the spec.
If you set the macro itself having two of them can lead to the awkwar
Did a PR for this on Friday. Comments on #1256 are welcome.
--
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/316#issuecomment-640425280_
Thanks @ignatenkobrain
I tested that patch, worked fine :+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/issues/1261#issuecomment-640427891_
Merged #1259 into master.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1259#event-3418629316___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
Thanks for the patch though.
--
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/1259#issuecomment-640429529___
Rpm-maint mailing lis
Doh...
--
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/1259#issuecomment-640429423___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.
Most tools rpm interacts with don't *have* their own configuration, that's
mostly limited to SCMs. It might well be sufficient set HOME to some temporary
build directory during build scriptlets, or something like that.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply t
Closed #1261.
--
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/1261#event-3419175160___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.r
Backported to rawhide & fixed in master.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1261#issuecomment-640492804___
Rpm-mai
I would like to avoid `nocheck`, because the common way to conditinalize would
be `%if %{without nocheck}` and that's just confusing to read.
--
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-ma
> I think this should set _with_check unless _without_check is defined already.
> Basically to have `%bcond_without check` by default without having to put it
> in all spec files. But still need to make sure that somebody defines
> `%bcond_without check`, this code won't override it.
That would
Just to record my findings so far:
- *some* %transfiletriggerin scripts do run, but not all
- on erasure, the triggers on the very same conditions that miss on install do
run, eg
```
$ rpm -q --filetriggers hicolor-icon-theme
transfiletriggerin scriptlet (using /bin/sh) -- /usr/share/icons/hicolo
> But why? If a package contains a config is /usr/lib/sysusers.d/, why not to
> ensure that it is installed after systemd-sysusers binary is present and so
> the scriptlet which creates users can be executed?
Yes, in that case the dependency is warranted.
> If there is just a scriptlet which ca
aka OrderWithRequires. Use __find_order in the attribute files
Resolves: #1257
Please test!
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1262
-- Commit Summary --
* Add support for dependency generators for RPMTAG_ORDER
@mlschroe commented on this pull request.
> +state->logging = 1;
+
+/* ...don't log test transactions */
+if (rpmtsFlags(ts) & (RPMTRANS_FLAG_TEST|RPMTRANS_FLAG_BUILD_PROBS))
+ state->logging = 0;
+
+/* ...don't log chroot transactions */
+if (!rstreq(rpmtsRootDir(ts),
Is there any coordination between this and the work to add dbus to libdnf in
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/941 for example?
For rpm-ostree we are already a DBus daemon, and having multiple other
libraries in the stack also going out and talking to DBus is going to be a b
@cgwalters commented on this pull request.
> +state->logging = 1;
+
+/* ...don't log test transactions */
+if (rpmtsFlags(ts) & (RPMTRANS_FLAG_TEST|RPMTRANS_FLAG_BUILD_PROBS))
+ state->logging = 0;
+
+/* ...don't log chroot transactions */
+if (!rstreq(rpmtsRootDir(ts),
@jlebon commented on this pull request.
> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+'\" t
+.TH "RPM-DBUS-ANNOUNCE" "8" "03 Jun 2020" "Red Hat, Inc."
+.SH NAME
+rpm-plugin-dbus-announce \- DBus plugin for the RPM Package Manager
+
+.SH Description
+
+The plugin writes basic information about rpm transactions to the
+sys
21 matches
Mail list logo
