Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: BuildRequires generator (#104)
@nim-nim: "... define the best dynamic BR strategy over time" is *EXACTLY* the chicken-egg problem mentioned by @ffesti. Think a bit ... -- 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/104#issuecomment-364815788___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Also apply signatures to config files (#374)
Yes --replacefiles just sets a transaction flag bit (equivalent to ".*" but there are no patterns involved). By "disable", I mean build all packages without %config or %ghost, avoiding the need for special handling, and simplifying ima appraisals on embedded devices (the example given in #364). Truly, the %config path renaming in rpm makes little sense on vendor managed embedded devices using ima signatures. Just don't use %config, treat all files the same, and write your ima appraisal policies to avoid mutable files (which you will have to do anyways to handle the RFE in #364). -- 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/374#issuecomment-364814623___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Also apply signatures to config files (#374)
The --replacefiles option seems to work on an equivalent of a regex matching all files (`.*`). You are saying 'What rpm lacks is an ability to apply --replacefiles to only some of the %config files in the packages being installed in a single transaction'. What other choice do we have then than to give the user control over picking the files either by exact match or, to be more flexible, regular expressions. Regexs would let him choose 'some of the %config files' as you say and not necessarily all of them. I don't understand your last paragraph: 'disable %config (and %ghost) in packaging and metadata' -- do you mean to patch the signature creation side in rpmsign ? -- 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/374#issuecomment-364798174___ 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: BuildRequires generator (#104)
@ffesti You're complicating things unecessary, rpm does not distinguish between manual and dynamic provides, there's no need to distinguish between manual and dynamic BuildRequires either In a dynamic BuildRequires world, the spec still contains static BuildRequires (sufficient to pull in the build root whatever is necessary to compute the dynamic BuildRequires) and the packager executes at the end of %prep whatever command or commands are appropriate to compute those BuildRequires That allows the packager to "fix" the project state that serves as a base to the computation, to massage the command output if needed, etc All it needs is an rpm entry point that pipes a string or a string list into the BuildRequires list during %prep, for mock or whatever to read the final BuildRequires state at the end of %prep and complete the build root as needed If you want maximum flexibility you can even forget about %prep or not %prep, and do it with two spec verbs: 1. one verb that accepts piping new BuildRequires (one per line, without the BuildRequires prefix) or alternatively as arguments 2. another verb that basically kicks the build system and tells it "add to the build root all the BuildRequires not already present" and let packagers define the best dynamic BR strategy over time. Adding BRs just in time would simplify a lot of ifdefing in %build and %check for example: just request the BRs in the optional section instead of trying to sync several optional sections in different parts of the spec -- 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/104#issuecomment-364795706___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] pythondistdeps: "environment markers" (PEP-508) support is broken (#382)
@ignatenkobrain Attempting to fake the state that environment markers check (and doing so incompletely) is currently causing pain in pipenv: https://github.com/pypa/pipenv/issues/857 But if you can get pkg_resources to support this natively, then I think that would be the ideal outcome (and based on reading the linked issue, Jason seems amenable to that approach) -- 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/382#issuecomment-364745405___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
