Re: OK: rust.spec

[Jakub Bogusz]

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 01:12:44AM +0200, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Oct 2020, PLD th-x32 builder wrote:
> 
> > rust.spec (auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2): OK
> > 
> > --- rust.spec:auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2:
> > upgrading packages
> > Build-Time: user:22480.24s sys:327.35s real:7031.10s (faults io:17 
> > non-io:47582180)
> > 
> > Files queued for ftp:
> >   13348158 rust-debuginfo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm
> >  10224 zsh-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm
> >   8428 bash-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm
> >4034573 cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm
> >   14821218 rust-doc-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm
> >   8969 rust-lldb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm
> >  10439 rust-gdb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm
> >   9304 rust-debugger-common-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm
> >   56994390 rust-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm
> >410 rust-1.44.1-2.src.rpm.uploadinfo
> 
> Unfortunately this build does not produce x32 output.

It appeared that gnux32 ABI is not default for this compiler, one must
add --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32 to rustc or cargo.

With few hacks (simulating crosscompilation in rust part) and fixing one
vendored package librsvg built as x32.

ow I'm trying with mozjs78, which blocks more packages (e.g. current polkit
or gnome-shell).


-- 
Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en

Re: [packages/rpm-pld-macros] - version 1.752: "noarchpackage" macro to cut down boilerplate

[Jan Rękorajski]

On Fri, 02 Oct 2020, qboosh wrote:

> commit 0b4ebb8c0a63e29ec47b0e6d4f78c9f2759a5a9c
> Author: Jakub Bogusz 
> Date:   Fri Oct 2 17:11:47 2020 +0200
> 
> - version 1.752: "noarchpackage" macro to cut down boilerplate

> 
>  macros.pld  | 8 
>  rpm-pld-macros.spec | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> ---
> diff --git a/rpm-pld-macros.spec b/rpm-pld-macros.spec
> index 4bb0e55..0aa5cf4 100644
> --- a/rpm-pld-macros.spec
> +++ b/rpm-pld-macros.spec
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -%define  rpm_macros_rev  1.751
> +%define  rpm_macros_rev  1.752
>  %define  find_lang_rev   1.40
>  # split into individual X_prov_ver if there is a reason to desync
>  %define  prov_ver4.15
> diff --git a/macros.pld b/macros.pld
> index ed5a896..93386d5 100644
> --- a/macros.pld
> +++ b/macros.pld
> @@ -521,6 +521,14 @@ Provides: %{1} = 
> %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{?version:%{version}}%{?release:-%{release}
>  %_ver_lt()   %(test $(rpmvercmp "%{1}" "%{2}" >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?) -ne 
> 2; echo $?)
>  %_ver_ge()   %(test $(rpmvercmp "%{1}" "%{2}" >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?) -eq 
> 2; echo $?)
>  
> +# noarch subpackage helper
> +# BuildRequires: rpmbuild(macros) >= 1.752
> +%noarchpackage \
> +%if %{_ver_ge '%{_rpmversion}' '4.6'} \
> +BuildArch:   noarch \
> +%endif \
> +%{nil}
> +
>  %apache_modules_api %{expand:%%global apache_modules_api %(awk '/#define 
> MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MAJOR/ {print $3}' /usr/include/apache/ap_mmn.h 
> 2>/dev/null || echo ERROR)}%apache_modules_api
>  
>  # sgml macros

Wht do we even have this junk? Is *anyone* running such an ancient rpm
that does not understand noarch subpackages?

We should just remove the condition instead of trying to make it prettier.

-- 
Jan Rękorajski| PLD/Linux
SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en