[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] built-in sysusers.d support fails to parse config files? (Issue #2741)
I'm packaging something that uses sysusers.d config snippet for the first time, and I'm getting this error from RPM (?) after a successful build: ``` error: lua script failed: [string "add_sysuser"]:16: invalid sysuser type: #Type 3<(%lua) 2< (%add_sysuser) ``` It appears that the sysusers.d config snippet parser fails to parse (or rather, ignore) comments? The line starting with `#Type` is from the sysusers.d documentation: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/sysusers.d.html -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2741 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement a declarative autobuild system (prototype) (PR #2620)
@ferdnyc commented on this pull request. > @@ -1349,5 +1349,14 @@ end end } +# example autobuild macros for autotools +%autobuild_autotools_prep() %autosetup -p1 I'm not sure I understand `%prep` being part of this. It's not going to differ from one build system to another, and including it in the `%build -a` steps increases the number of spec files that won't be able to use autobuild because they need to perform some sort of pre-build shenanigans. (Running `sed` on some of the extracted files, extracting additional %SOURCEN tarballs, etc...) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2620#pullrequestreview-1706855222 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] docs/macros.md: Fix expansion shorthand (PR #2739)
Actually, a question this brings up for me, because it's not clear from the
docs: Do `%{?!foo}` and `%{!?foo}` mean different things? That section of the
docs only documents `%{?!foo:value}` (as the negation to `%{?foo:value}`), but
then goes on to use `%{!?foo:value}` in the examples without explanation.
In my testing via command-line `rpm --eval` using RPM 4.18.1, there doesn't
appear to be any obvious difference.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2739#issuecomment-1787543317
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Exit from mktree on failure (PR #2740)
Right now, if the podman image fails to build or rpm fails to build/install, we happily continue and run the test-suite, only to eventually fail with some cryptic error, such as: error: cannot find rpm Not too helpful, indeed. Instead, just fail the whole tree preparation process if we encounter an error. Fix the return code of unshared() so that we dont fail on that, though. Also, when building the RPM layer, use a proper cleanup trap instead of ignoring SIGINT since a failing make_install() can now terminate the script. Fixes: #2667 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2740 -- Commit Summary -- * Exit from mktree on failure -- File Changes -- M tests/mktree.oci (7) M tests/mktree.rootfs (2) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2740.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2740.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2740 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] docs/macros.md: Fix expansion shorthand (PR #2739)
The Macros documentation claimed that
```spec
0%{!?with_python3:1}
```
was a shorthand for
```spec
%{?with_python3:1}%{!?with_python3:0}
```
which is expanded to 1 if with_python3 is defined and 0
otherwise.
Thats true of the latter, but not the former, which would expand to `1`
(actually `01`) if `with_python3` is _not_ defined. Correct to
`0%{?with_python3:1}`.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2739
-- Commit Summary --
* docs/macros.md: Fix expansion shorthand
-- File Changes --
M docs/manual/macros.md (2)
-- Patch Links --
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2739.patch
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2739.diff
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2739
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com
___
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] Please provide `%excludes` section (Issue #1852)
> I still don't like the duplicity, though
Neither do I. I just hope that my example is exceptional and the entry would be
enough to list in `%excludes` section in most of the cases
> Example of what I mean:
Huh, I think my brain is going to explode now thinking about the example
:exploding_head: But does it mean that this would include the file after all?
~~~
%files
%{gem_instdir}/config
%excludes
%{gem_instdir}/config
~~~
Also, I believe that your examples are not really equivalent. Because one of
the issues is that currently `%excludes` does exclude such item from package,
but does not exclude it from other processing (which is actually one of the
problems). This might also disqualify #2555
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1852#issuecomment-1787306967
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
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] Please provide `%excludes` section (Issue #1852)
Oh! My bad, I didn't realize this. Of course, this is a good point and something to consider if/when we design the solution. I still don't like the duplicity, though. We could perhaps make it so that the `%excludes` section would just be "syntactic sugar" for explicit `%exclude` lines in all `%files` sections (plus the fact that RPM wouldn't complain about unpackaged files at the end), but then, it might be harder to follow when reading the SPEC... -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1852#issuecomment-1787236165 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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] Please provide `%excludes` section (Issue #1852)
> > Note that the `%{gem_instdir}/config` is excluded form the main package,
> > but then it is not obvious if it should not be included elsewhere.
> > Therefore it is listed for the second time in the `%excludes` section to
> > make it clear it is not forgotten and it should really be excluded.
>
> This seems redundant, though. Why would you need an `%exclude` in the
> `%files` section at all in this case?
Please note that in this specific case, the whole `%{gem_instdir}` is included
in the package, except the `%{gem_instdir}/config` entry. However, it does not
make clear in global context if `%{gem_instdir}/config` should be included
elsewhere. To make it clear, it would need to be listed in other package or in
`%excludes` section, otherwise it would be reported as an error (similarly if
you miss some file).
IOW, this is to prevent mistakes.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1852#issuecomment-1787195946
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
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: Standardize on OCI images for test-suite, even locally (Issue #2643)
Closed #2643 as completed via #2733. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2643#event-10820445930 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Standardize on OCI images in test-suite (PR #2733)
Merged #2733 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2733#event-10820445524 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Standardize on OCI images in test-suite (PR #2733)
Works for me :+1: -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2733#issuecomment-1787162202 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fail test image build on cmake failure (Issue #2667)
Turns out that a step that fails terminates the whole job, of course, so it's not a matter of configuration but rather a bug in the `mktree` script which currently doesn't terminate on a failed `make install`. Working on a fix. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2667#issuecomment-1787141824 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Use uniform formatting for SEE ALSO sections (PR #2732)
@pmatilai > I don't have a strong opinion either, this was just a statistical observation > And therefore technically correct. (["The best kind of correct!"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo)) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2732#issuecomment-1787084013 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] 4.18.0 unbuildable on macOS (Issue #2222)
Documentation clarified in commit 61000db0bcce33c7c137c927a22f6ab9d926bee1 -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/#issuecomment-1787052631 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] 4.18.0 unbuildable on macOS (Issue #2222)
Closed # as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/#event-10819623918 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Port rpm test-suite away from autotest (Issue #2098)
Yup, was thinking along the same lines lately. It has its quirks but it works just fine, even in this new container-based setup, and migrating it away would be a colossal amount of work for little to no benefit. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2098#issuecomment-1787043649 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Port rpm test-suite away from autotest (Issue #2098)
Actually... since the autotest system integrates so nicely with cmake, there's very little point in this. The kind of obscene amount of time and energy as porting would take is better spent elsewhere. Closing, we can always revisit the decision if it becomes a liability for whatever reason. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2098#issuecomment-1787021698 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Port rpm test-suite away from autotest (Issue #2098)
Closed #2098 as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2098#event-10819407647 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: allow append to previously declared spec sections (#1240)
Fixed by #2728 -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1240#issuecomment-1786718055 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %patch from not the start of the line does not work (#1088)
This is got fixed by the way of #2205 in #2730. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1088#issuecomment-1786689611 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %patch from not the start of the line does not work (#1088)
Closed #1088 as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1088#event-10816947347 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix typos (PR #2737)
Thanks for the fixes! -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2737#issuecomment-1786683577 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fix typos (PR #2737)
Merged #2737 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2737#event-10816892415 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: Allow multiple snippets of the same build script (#1223)
This use-case is now covered by append/prepend modes (#2728) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1223#issuecomment-1786679471 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ 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: Allow multiple snippets of the same build script (#1223)
Closed #1223 as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1223#event-10816871193 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
