Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM v6 package format, first public draft for commenting (Discussion #2374)
File-based self-dependencies are not going anywhere in general, because rpm uses that info for its own purposes. Besides, they serve as a dependency generation sanity check, and avoid surprises when (not if) packages get split to smaller pieces. Whether those %config() deps in particular serve any purpose is a whole other question. AIUI the alleged original use-case is to allow installing packages with --noconfigs while supplying alternative configuration via eg site-specific packages. Only it never worked (without resorting to --nodeps and such) because --noconfigs is global. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2374#discussioncomment-8061626 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] RPM v6 package format, first public draft for commenting (Discussion #2374)
See https://web.archive.org/web/20070621191805/https://www.redhat.com/archives/rpm-list/2001-April/msg00283.html -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2374#discussioncomment-8061569 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] RPM v6 package format, first public draft for commenting (Discussion #2374)
It may be considered legacy in Fedora but I disagree. It's not going anywhere. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2374#discussioncomment-8061517 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] Documentation refers to %prein and %postin, which do not seem to be supported (Issue #2834)
OTOH, %pre should become rare again once the native user/group handling starts getting actually used. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2834#issuecomment-1882534469 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] Documentation refers to %prein and %postin, which do not seem to be supported (Issue #2834)
And yup, most of rpm documentation is either really old, or really recent, with a circa 20 year gap in between. I try to leave some old stuff around just for the historical context/curiosity, but that statement about %pre rarity is just wrong and needs to go. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2834#issuecomment-1882533295 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
Merged #2831 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#event-11418620125 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
Oh okay, arm64, that's a difference. But then it doesn't happen on Fedora koji builds on that platform, eg here: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/rpm/4.19.1/1.fc39/data/logs/aarch64/build.log Could be a difference in installed packages perhaps, maybe there's a cmake module that "leaks" its own include of that file or something like that. Oh well. Thanks for the patch! -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1881156603 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
This is a fresh boot of the Fedora arm64 image available for download here: https://fedora.mirrorservice.org/fedora/linux/releases/39/Workstation/aarch64/images/Fedora-Workstation-39-1.5.aarch64.raw.xz I'm using it only to build RPM in a VM (my host is an Apple ARM notebook) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1881133456 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
This seems pretty bizarre, all I get is ``` [...] -- Looking for sys/auxv.h -- Looking for sys/auxv.h - found -- Looking for major -- Looking for major - found -- Performing Test found -- Performing Test found - Success [...] ``` And that's how it goes in all our CI builds, Fedora packages and so on. Do you have any cmake-related environment variables set, or something like that? Can you reproduce on another user account? Apologies for the "interrogation" on what's a correct patch, but if there's a setting somewhere that makes cmake more strict for mistakes like this one then we should have it enabled. And if it's something else, I sure would like to understand what. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1881123031 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] Update format documentation in the manual (PR #2835)
@dralley commented on this pull request. > @@ -229,7 +216,7 @@ In our example there would be 32 such 16-byte index > entries, followed by the data section: ``` -0210: 72 70 6d 00 32 2e 31 2e 32 00 31 00 52 65 64 20rpm.2.1.2.1.Red +0210: 72 70 6d 00 32 2e 31 2e 32 00 31 00 52 65 64 20rpm.2.1.2.1.Red Fixed, my editor removed the trailing space -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2835#discussion_r1444732504 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] Update format documentation in the manual (PR #2835)
@dralley pushed 1 commit. c579fbf1a914f96fa14465acec97390197740f54 Update format documentation in the manual -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2835/files/dbd7eb8f93c9804ff37ae22ef8d01f507b384318..c579fbf1a914f96fa14465acec97390197740f54 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
Sure, this is what happens with a fresh clone: ``` teknoraver@fedora:~/src/rpm$ git reset --hard upstream/master HEAD is now at 75965c1e7 rpmcli.h forces a public dependency on popt includes teknoraver@fedora:~/src/rpm$ git clean -fdx Removing CMakeCache.txt Removing CMakeFiles/ teknoraver@fedora:~/src/rpm$ cmake . -- The C compiler identification is GNU 13.2.1 -- Detecting C compiler ABI info -- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/cc - skipped -- Detecting C compile features -- Detecting C compile features - done -- Found PkgConfig: /usr/bin/pkg-config (found version "1.9.5") -- Found Lua: /usr/lib64/liblua-5.4.so;/usr/lib64/libm.so (found suitable version "5.4.6", minimum required is "5.2") -- Found ZLIB: /usr/lib64/libz.so (found version "1.2.13") -- Could NOT find BZip2 (missing: BZIP2_LIBRARIES BZIP2_INCLUDE_DIR) -- Performing Test Iconv_IS_BUILT_IN -- Performing Test Iconv_IS_BUILT_IN - Success -- Found Iconv: built in to C library -- Checking for module 'popt' -- Found popt, version 1.19 -- Checking for module 'readline' -- Package 'readline', required by 'virtual:world', not found -- Checking for module 'libzstd>=1.3.8' -- Found libzstd, version 1.5.5 -- Checking for module 'libelf' -- Found libelf, version 0.190 -- Checking for module 'libdw' -- Found libdw, version 0.190 -- Checking for module 'liblzma>=5.2.0' -- Found liblzma, version 5.4.4 -- Found OpenMP_C: -fopenmp (found suitable version "4.5", minimum required is "4.5") -- Found OpenMP: TRUE (found suitable version "4.5", minimum required is "4.5") -- Found Intl: built in to C library -- Checking for module 'sqlite3>=3.22' -- Found sqlite3, version 3.42.0 -- Found Python3: /usr/bin/python3.12 (found suitable version "3.12.1", minimum required is "3.7") found components: Interpreter Development Development.Module Development.Embed -- Checking for module 'libcap' -- Found libcap, version 2.48 -- Checking for module 'libacl' -- Found libacl, version 2.3.1 -- Checking for module 'audit' -- Found audit, version 3.1.2 -- Checking for module 'libselinux' -- Found libselinux, version 3.5 -- Checking for module 'libarchive' -- Found libarchive, version 3.7.1 -- Looking for stpcpy -- Looking for stpcpy - found -- Looking for stpncpy -- Looking for stpncpy - found -- Looking for putenv -- Looking for putenv - found -- Looking for mempcpy -- Looking for mempcpy - found -- Looking for fdatasync -- Looking for fdatasync - found -- Looking for lutimes -- Looking for lutimes - found -- Looking for mergesort -- Looking for mergesort - not found -- Looking for getauxval -- Looking for getauxval - found -- Looking for setprogname -- Looking for setprogname - not found -- Looking for __progname -- Looking for __progname - found -- Looking for syncfs -- Looking for syncfs - found -- Looking for sched_getaffinity -- Looking for sched_getaffinity - found -- Looking for unshare -- Looking for unshare - found -- Looking for secure_getenv -- Looking for secure_getenv - found -- Looking for __secure_getenv -- Looking for __secure_getenv - not found -- Looking for mremap -- Looking for mremap - found -- Looking for strchrnul -- Looking for strchrnul - found -- Looking for mkstemp -- Looking for mkstemp - found -- Looking for getcwd -- Looking for getcwd - found -- Looking for basename -- Looking for basename - found -- Looking for dirname -- Looking for dirname - found -- Looking for realpath -- Looking for realpath - found -- Looking for setenv -- Looking for setenv - found -- Looking for unsetenv -- Looking for unsetenv - found -- Looking for regcomp -- Looking for regcomp - found -- Looking for utimes -- Looking for utimes - found -- Looking for getline -- Looking for getline - found -- Looking for localtime_r -- Looking for localtime_r - found -- Looking for statvfs -- Looking for statvfs - found -- Looking for getaddrinfo -- Looking for getaddrinfo - found -- Looking for openat -- Looking for openat - found -- Looking for mkdirat -- Looking for mkdirat - found -- Looking for fstatat -- Looking for fstatat - found -- Looking for linkat -- Looking for linkat - found -- Looking for symlinkat -- Looking for symlinkat - found -- Looking for mkfifoat -- Looking for mkfifoat - found -- Looking for mknodat -- Looking for mknodat - found -- Looking for unlinkat -- Looking for unlinkat - found -- Looking for renameat -- Looking for renameat - found -- Looking for utimensat -- Looking for utimensat - found -- Looking for fchmodat -- Looking for fchmodat - found -- Looking for fchownat -- Looking for fchownat - found -- Looking for unistd.h -- Looking for unistd.h - found -- Looking for limits.h -- Looking for limits.h - found -- Looking for getopt.h -- Looking for getopt.h - found -- Looking for sys/utsname.h -- Looking for sys/utsname.h - found -- Looking for sys/systemcfg.h -- Looking for sys/systemcfg.h - not found -- Looking for sys/param.h -- Looking for sys/param.h - found -- Looking for sys/auxv
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add missing include (PR #2831)
Huh. That's where our CI is building every PR on the project, and what I use locally. Without seeing any errors from this. Can you provide a full reproducer for getting to that failure, I'd like to try and understand what's going on here. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1881005655 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] Create Issue templates for Bug reports and RFEs (PR #2823)
@pmatilai commented on this pull request. > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +name: Feature request +about: Suggest an idea for this project +title: '' +labels: RFE +assignees: '' + +--- + +If your feature need figuring out how to implement it or needs feedback from the wider comunity, please open a [Discussion](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions) instead. If the discussion has solidified into a plan of action it is time to create an issue for actually implementing it. It's not the same work, otherwise there would be little point in all this. Discussions are better for discussions than tickets, and tickets are better for organizing work. This is work *we* do so maybe we get to decide how to do it, no? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2823#discussion_r1444628542 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] Create Issue templates for Bug reports and RFEs (PR #2823)
@Conan-Kudo commented on this pull request. > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +name: Feature request +about: Suggest an idea for this project +title: '' +labels: RFE +assignees: '' + +--- + +If your feature need figuring out how to implement it or needs feedback from the wider comunity, please open a [Discussion](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions) instead. If the discussion has solidified into a plan of action it is time to create an issue for actually implementing it. Unless someone is committing to doing that same work in Discussions, we should not be telling people to go there. Discussions should not be treated like that. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2823#discussion_r1444584514 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
I'm using Fedora 39: ``` $ cmake --version cmake version 3.27.7 ``` -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1880801345 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] document un-numbered Patch lines (Issue #2821)
I'm afraid it's undocumented except for the release notes: https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.15.0 The meaning of a numberless `Patch:` has varied over the years. Initially it was equal to Patch0, then was a special entry of its own, and then, because it was already broken and ambiguous, it was hijacked for automatic patch numbering in 4.15. Same story with `Source`. So yep, we need to document this and also `%patchlist` and `%sourcelist` sections. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2821#issuecomment-1880791870 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] %missingok is undocumented (Issue #2833)
There's just one flag for it all (`RPMFILE_MISSINGOK`) so `%config(missingok)` equals `%config %missingok`. The standalone `%missingok` was only added in 2016 (8efe51e8c24b7739f0bf7680e21083c8964633f5) so relatively late. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2833#issuecomment-1880776463 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] Documentation refers to %prein and %postin, which do not seem to be supported (Issue #2834)
They're just copy-paste/thinkos because the tags have the *in part, but %pre and %post don't. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2834#issuecomment-1880766241 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] 4.19 unbuildable on macOS due to Linux-specific extensions (Issue #2807)
Closed #2807 as completed. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2807#event-11415849160 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] 4.19 unbuildable on macOS due to Linux-specific extensions (Issue #2807)
As per above report, fixed by #2812 -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2807#issuecomment-1880745280 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 unconditional uses of Linux-specific extensions (PR #2812)
Merged #2812 into master. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2812#event-11415830473 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 unconditional uses of Linux-specific extensions (PR #2812)
As per https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2807#issuecomment-1877296382 mission accomplished. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2812#issuecomment-1880742543 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] 4.19 unbuildable on macOS due to Linux-specific extensions (Issue #2807)
Excellent! :partying_face: And again, thank you for reporting, suggesting fixes and testing. This is how it works :+1: It's also worth noting that absolutely nothing at all here was specific to macOS, just more fallout from the cmake switch. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2807#issuecomment-1880740019 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] Add missing include (PR #2831)
The patch is correct of course, but I'm curious: what cmake version is failing due to this? Because the project is certainly building fine on several platforms/distros as is. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2831#issuecomment-1880616268 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] Update format documentation in the manual (PR #2835)
@jobol commented on this pull request. > @@ -229,7 +216,7 @@ In our example there would be 32 such 16-byte index > entries, followed by the data section: ``` -0210: 72 70 6d 00 32 2e 31 2e 32 00 31 00 52 65 64 20rpm.2.1.2.1.Red +0210: 72 70 6d 00 32 2e 31 2e 32 00 31 00 52 65 64 20rpm.2.1.2.1.Red IMHO The trail space is expected in that particular case -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2835#pullrequestreview-1808238410 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
