The pkg variable used in the parallel loop was declared outside
of the omp parallel construct, so it was shared among tasks. This
had the potential to cause a data race. The gcc openmp implementation
did not hit this problem, but I uncovered it while trying to compile with
clang. My best guess
@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:
Thanks. One question: do I understand correctly that currently there is no way
to make a generator of Requires(pre), Requires(post), Requires(postun),
OrderWithRequires(pre) etc.?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on
Does this mean that constructions like "OrderWithRequires: >= VERSION" are
supported?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Yes, sure. This is a dependency as all the others and does support the same
features. The only difference is that OrderWithRequires is ignored during the
dependency check and only used for ordering.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email
OrderWithRequires(pre) would probably be better for the use case which is
described in this PR, but OrderWithRequires without pre also worked. This is
probably some undocumented behaviour in dependency resolution, probably it
tries to install required packages before the package which requires
@ffesti I see that you added "RPMTAG_ORDERNAME, RPMTAG_ORDERVERSION,
RPMTAG_ORDERFLAGS," (
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1262/files#diff-ddf4f9f570183f31f3d5ba0a715a954fR1406
), but I added "RPMTAG_ORDERNAME, RPMTAG_ORDERFLAGS,". I actually did not test
Hit merge just a little bit too quickly on this one...
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1263
-- Commit Summary --
* Fix tag mixup in 32e2bc50cff9db05729349ff6645a0251d5719fb
-- File Changes --
M
*sigh* Fixed in #1263
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Yes, not having a dependency generator for OrderWithRequires is clearly an
oversight. Details on what generators are a valid use case are not relevant
here.
Thanks for the patch!
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on
Merged #1257 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/1257#event-3424224260___
Rpm-maint mailing list
This is indeed not possible. The argument here is (except that it is simply not
implemented) that those dependencies are generated from files in the package
and not the scriptlets. So qualifiers should not be needed. But I am pretty
sure people could come up with some valid use cases.
There is
> Is there any coordination between this and the work to add dbus to libdnf in
> [rpm-software-management/libdnf#941](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/941)
> for example?
Well, we add this on request of the DNF team that need to be notified if
something else (rpm cli)
Looks good to me. Should probably also go into 4.16.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Closed #1262.
--
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/1262#event-3424205732___
Rpm-maint mailing list
*arg* I didn't even realize #1257 is a PR with a patch attached already. Please
disregard.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
16 matches
Mail list logo
