Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support triple operator for conditional shortcut (#115) (#746)
pmatilai requested changes on this pull request. If I interpret that correctly, you just dismiss all the spaces that might be there. So what if you WANT to emit spaces? Also, the triple syntax has to give the same exact results as doing the same thing without the older conditional operator for consistency's and sanity's sake. If I interpret that correctly, you just dismiss all the spaces that might be there. So what if you WANT to emit spaces? It's equally common and legit thing to do. Also, the triple syntax has to give the same exact results as doing the same thing without the older conditional operator for consistency's and sanity's sake. Rip out support for all those extra spaces, I'm not going to accept this as long as they're there. -- 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/746#pullrequestreview-271125720___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support triple operator for conditional shortcut (#115) (#746)
> And how do you're supposed to know which spaces before and after the 0/1 are
> intentional or not? This must expand literally to either " 0 " or " 1".
According to the specification of triple operator - all spaces
- after '%{?!' or '%{?',
- before and after ':' that divides the operator and
- before the last '}'
till the first nonspace char must been omitted. This can be described in the
commit message explicitly.
Packagers tend to use spaces before ':' in the current condition operator, even
if "courtesy"
spaces are not supported. In the current case spaces usually do not change the
meaning of the spec file line and improve readability and alignment.
--
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/746#issuecomment-518247611___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support triple operator for conditional shortcut (#115) (#746)
```
%global with_lua %{?{_without_lua} : 0 : 1}
```
And how do you're supposed to know which spaces before and after the 0/1 are
intentional or not? This *must* expand literally to either " 0 " or " 1".
Rip support for the "courtesy" spaces everywhere.
--
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/746#issuecomment-518211001___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Need to limit threads based on available memory and address space (#804)
FWIW https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118734 is also related, there are systems with huge number of CPUs but limited memory. So we'll need have means to get available memory on both per-process and system-wide basis, and have separate calculations(+macros) for the number of parallel processes and threads. -- 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/804#issuecomment-518203928___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmbuild output is garbled (#794)
Yeah we probably should stop grabbing stdout on our own when we dont actually use the data. Besides causing various display-artifacts under mock and the like, it's also simply doing a whole lot of work for no reason. -- 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/794#issuecomment-518200077___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
