Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 February 2014 10:20, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? I do keep track of the affected packages and may end up doing that, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074261 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/01/2014 03:23 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote: A number of packages install files to /etc/rpm in Rawhide; the proper place for macros.* is /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d for rpm = 4.11. And no matter what the location, these files should not be marked as %config. ... s4504kr gnustep-make s4504kr,salimma Fixed in gnustep-make-2.6.6-2 - -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: A36A937A Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: michel-...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS9HwXAAoJEEr1VKujapN6uLcH/RwBJ6BLneiEgtLxPzOAtHwa MwBbO1R3NkOc4HtB03e+YqlewYVbFXZhgQDF5rUYU0SMc/y6Yyh0uHFsvtOtuycj l5cNxMsIG3CiF1xuVeDkDVdWwyFX7UtzbW0MgdzrPvJA22c8s63fmlleED/rzz2V 75PXMhnbGtTwYKRH2rhcFUsFSfVFm6O661S8+jAk+quLLZc/qsA7IbacUFcHBJzV VklCPDp+sx1R50YIcuNBuMzZ4Vj8feQGWZ98nbCETCo4tytZIA74TsN8N90maNHD ZrJrVXsYK5KJOYHSEikRihBlg00pP6e8Hx5Aj2QAupKTQN89nQ6DvzGaOo6hZcU= =UbX4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
- Original Message - bkabrda python3 amcnabb,bkabrda,mstuchli,tomspur Fixed in python3-3.3.2-9.fc21 bkabrda python bkabrda,dmalcolm,ivazquez,jsteffan,mstuchli,tomspur,tradej Fixed in python-2.7.6-2.fc21 -- Regards, Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
Hello, On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi wrote: List of affected packages follows (maintainer package comaintainers): Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? Yes, it's more work initially, but the work would have a larger impact (the bug would keep being tracked, unlike an e-mail that is easily forgotten, and the rest of the mailing list wouldn't have to read fixed in... mail. (I truly don't know; perhaps it really is better to do small cleanups with a simple email without worrying whether the mass-filing script will run amok. So I'm asking.) Mirek -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 5 February 2014 10:20, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. Richard. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 01/31/2014 09:23 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: msuchy rhn-client-tools mzazrive Filed upstream bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1061013 -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 11:20:15AM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? There is a rough Guideline about mass bug filing: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_bug_filing If not all packages are fixed after a while, the bugs can still be filed. However it is also quite annoying if a lot of bugs are filed prematurely. For example I a lot of bugs were filed for missing AArch64 support but this was something that was fixed (for most if not all packages) at RPM level and not the individual package, resulting in lots of unnecessary bugs for which nobody felt responsible closing after they became invalid. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:40:20AM +, Richard Hughes wrote: On 5 February 2014 10:20, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. +1 Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 February 2014 10:20, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. Well, yes. That (or getting an automated check so that it is fixed once for all) puts an even bigger burden on the person noticing the problem. It should be possible to just flag a problem without committing to fix it personally - with the number of packages we have, we do need to distribute the work. Mirek -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 02/05/2014 11:40 AM, Richard Hughes wrote: For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. Usually yes. But e.g. in rhn-client-tools this path is used in code and the change is non-trivial. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com writes: On 02/05/2014 11:40 AM, Richard Hughes wrote: For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. Usually yes. But e.g. in rhn-client-tools this path is used in code and the change is non-trivial. It was similar in javapackages-tools. It included a change in documentation which would have most likely been missed by eager provenpackager and maintainers could just ignore a closed bug so this wouldn't have been fixed... Generally filing those 42 (yay, what a nice number) bugs would have been better IMO, but if you are willing to re-run that repoquery in a few months and file bugs for remaining packages I see no harm. -- Stanislav Ochotnicky sochotni...@redhat.com Software Engineer - Developer Experience PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com pgpXDPd_2OdUR.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 February 2014 10:20, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote: Wouldn't it be better to mass-file bugs? I do keep track of the affected packages and may end up doing that, depending on what happens in a week or two since I posted the initial message. It's good to see some maintainers fix their packages, but I don't think posting fixed messages on list has any value. For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a simple change. The problem with doing that is that it may end up keeping unmaintained packages lingering around unnoticed as they won't get flagged for not being built/updated by maintainers for N releases. I've done a bunch of such sweeping changes, for example fixed a lot of packages for the unversioned docdirs change in F-20 but I'm afraid that if maintainers couldn't be bothered to do such a simple think (and many not even bothered to simply merge the changes I made to rawhide to their F-20 branches and ship the update, nor replying to the filed bug), many of the packages I touched were effectively unmaintained and should have got new maintainers or be retired. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
Dne 31.1.2014 21:23, Ville Skyttä napsal(a):
A number of packages install files to /etc/rpm in Rawhide; the proper
place for macros.* is /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d for rpm = 4.11. And no
matter what the location, these files should not be marked as %config.
Specfiles not targeting EL 7 can simply replace %{_sysconfdir}/rpm
with %{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d and ones that wish to stay compatible
with EL5 and 6 can do something like this to find the proper dir:
%global macrosdir %(d=%{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d; [ -d $d ] ||
d=%{_sysconfdir}/rpm; echo $d)
Thanks for bringing this up. Just FYI, I proposed macro for the RPM
macros directory [1], which was not yet accepted/implemented:
List of affected packages follows (maintainer package comaintainers):
kanarip ruby bkabrda,jstribny,kanarip,mmorsi,mtasaka,skottler,tagoh,vondruch
kanarip rubygems kanarip,mtasaka,skottler,stahnma,vondruch
Will take care of these as soon as new Ruby is approved for F21. The fix
is already prepared for some while in Ruby 2.1 branch [2].
Vít
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045070
[2]
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/commit/?h=private-ruby-2.1id=0f37fb5c2c291a48379a7edb97c53ae991fcb401
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 01/31/2014 09:23 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: twaugh cups jpopelka Fixed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 31/01/14 21:23, Ville Skyttä wrote: phracek emacs jgu,phracek Fixed -- Best regards / S pozdravem Petr Hracek -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi writes: sochotni javapackages-tools java-sig,mizdebsk,msimacek,msrb Fixed in upstream git, will be in next release -- Stanislav Ochotnicky sochotni...@redhat.com Software Engineer - Developer Experience PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com pgpf3tZnV3NGT.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 2014-01-31, Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi wrote: A number of packages install files to /etc/rpm in Rawhide; the proper place for macros.* is /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d for rpm = 4.11. And no matter what the location, these files should not be marked as %config. [...] jplesnik perl corsepiu,cweyl,iarnell,jplesnik,kasal,perl-sig,ppisar,psabata,spot [...] ppisar perl-srpm-macros mmaslano,perl-sig Fixed in perl-5.18.2-296.fc21 and perl-srpm-macros-1-11.fc21. -- Petr -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 22:23:51 +0200
Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi wrote:
Specfiles not targeting EL 7 can simply replace %{_sysconfdir}/rpm
with %{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d and ones that wish to stay compatible
with EL5 and 6 can do something like this to find the proper dir:
%global macrosdir %(d=%{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d; [ -d $d ] ||
d=%{_sysconfdir}/rpm; echo $d)
jussilehtola libint (none)
Fixed.
--
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 31 January 2014 20:23, Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi wrote: kwizart color-filesystem rhughes Fixed, thanks. Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
A number of packages install files to /etc/rpm in Rawhide; the proper
place for macros.* is /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d for rpm = 4.11. And no
matter what the location, these files should not be marked as %config.
Specfiles not targeting EL 7 can simply replace %{_sysconfdir}/rpm
with %{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d and ones that wish to stay compatible
with EL5 and 6 can do something like this to find the proper dir:
%global macrosdir %(d=%{_rpmconfigdir}/macros.d; [ -d $d ] ||
d=%{_sysconfdir}/rpm; echo $d)
List of affected packages follows (maintainer package comaintainers):
bkabrda python3 amcnabb,bkabrda,mstuchli,tomspur
bkabrda python bkabrda,dmalcolm,ivazquez,jsteffan,mstuchli,tomspur,tradej
cicku ldc bioinfornatics
deji mpich (none)
dledford openmpi dajt,deji,orion
epienbro mingw-filesystem ivanromanov,kalev,rjones
erikos sugar-toolkit erikos,pbrobinson,sdz,tomeu
erikos sugar-toolkit-gtk3 dsd,pbrobinson
jakub prelink mjw
jcapik octave alexlan,fkluknav,jussilehtola,mmahut,orion,rakesh
jjames ffcall salimma
jjames gap (none)
jjames xemacs stevetraylen
jnovy texlive pertusus,than
jorton httpd hubbitus,jkaluza
jorton php-pear remi,timj
jorton php remi
jplesnik perl corsepiu,cweyl,iarnell,jplesnik,kasal,perl-sig,ppisar,psabata,spot
jussilehtola libint (none)
jzeleny scl-utils bkabrda,jzeleny
kanarip ruby bkabrda,jstribny,kanarip,mmorsi,mtasaka,skottler,tagoh,vondruch
kanarip rubygems kanarip,mtasaka,skottler,stahnma,vondruch
kwizart color-filesystem rhughes
limb drupal7 asrob,pfrields,siwinski
mmorsi jruby bkabrda,goldmann,vondruch
mstuchli pypy tomspur
msuchy rhn-client-tools mzazrive
nim fontpackages fonts-sig,frixxon,tagoh
orion hdf5 davidcl,pertusus
patches nodejs-packaging humaton,jamielinux,mrunge,sgallagh
patches nodejs-tap jamielinux
peter erlang-rpm-macros erlang-sig
petersen ghc-rpm-macros haskell-sig,petersen
phracek emacs jgu,phracek
pjones pesign (none)
pmatilai redhat-rpm-config jcm,pmatilai
ppisar perl-srpm-macros mmaslano,perl-sig
rdieter ggz-base-libs (none)
rdieter polkit-qt mbriza,rnovacek,than
remi php-horde-Horde-Role nb
rmattes ros-release (none)
rombobeorn fedora-gnat-project-common (none)
rstrode GConf2 walters
s4504kr blender fcami,hobbes1069,kwizart,roma
s4504kr gnustep-make s4504kr,salimma
smani keyrings-filesystem (none)
sochotni javapackages-tools java-sig,mizdebsk,msimacek,msrb
spot generic-release bruno
spot R salimma
than sip kkofler,ltinkl,rdieter
twaugh cups jpopelka
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages installing files to /etc/rpm
On 31.01.2014 21:23, Ville Skyttä wrote: smani keyrings-filesystem (none) Fixed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
