Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:22:49PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Zbigniew

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:22:49PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:04:25AM -0400, Neal

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:04:25AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek >> wrote: >> > I wanted to submit a PR for this, but I wasn't

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:04:25AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:04:25AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 08:18:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Randy Barlow > >>

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 08:18:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Randy Barlow >> wrote: >> > On 02/12/2018 08:00 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: >> >>

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 08:18:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Randy Barlow > wrote: > > On 02/12/2018 08:00 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: > >> The changelogs are long ass hell. > >> What about keeping just 2 latest releases in it and

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Hello, On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Michal Novotny wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Panu Matilainen > wrote: > >> On 02/09/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 11:05 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 9.2.2018 v 09:21 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > > Matthew Miller wrote: > > > Second, there's package maintainer changelogs. These are really > > > redundant with the dist-git log. We don't really need this > > > anymore. > > > It's just a

Release notes vs. Changelogs [was Re: Escaping macros in %changelog]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:00:18AM +0100, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: > Actually, the problem is we're all talking about changelogs, when users ask > for release notes. > That's not exactly the same thing. Yes! Thanks, that puts nicely what I'm trying to say. Right now, the git log is

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 12:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 11:59 -0500, David Cantrell wrote: > > The dist-git changelogs are mostly noise and I would prefer better > > organized information about impacts to users and developers. Like > > tell > > me what things changed in

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 15:33 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > The point is, we have LOTS of places where change information or > discussion occurs. We should try and have a canonical location for > the *descriptive summary* of these changes/discussions. This hit home. Way back in the early 90s when

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Hi, Actually, the problem is we're all talking about changelogs, when users ask for release notes. That's not exactly the same thing. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 12:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 11:59 -0500, David Cantrell wrote: > > The dist-git changelogs are mostly noise and I would prefer better > > organized information about impacts to users and developers. Like > > tell > > me what things changed in

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:07:27PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> > The dist-git changelogs are mostly noise and I would prefer better >> > organized information about impacts to users and developers. Like tell

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:07:27PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > The dist-git changelogs are mostly noise and I would prefer better > > organized information about impacts to users and developers. Like tell > > me what things changed in the new glibc package, not that the glibc RPM > > has

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 11:59 -0500, David Cantrell wrote: > The dist-git changelogs are mostly noise and I would prefer better > organized information about impacts to users and developers. Like tell > me what things changed in the new glibc package, not that the glibc RPM > has been upgraded to

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 08:18:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Randy Barlow > wrote: > > On 02/12/2018 08:00 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: > >> The changelogs are long ass hell. > >> What about keeping just 2 latest releases in it and

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 02/12/2018 08:00 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: >> The changelogs are long ass hell. >> What about keeping just 2 latest releases in it and deleting the rest? >> (It will be still kept in GIT history) >> 2 releases

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 02/12/2018 08:00 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: > The changelogs are long ass hell. > What about keeping just 2 latest releases in it and deleting the rest? > (It will be still kept in GIT history) > 2 releases could be 2- I usually trim my changelogs to the last year of entries. It's kinda

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 10:25:48PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > I personally find it abusing shared resources throwing builds at it which has > not been tested first. So I prefer to do local mockbuilds first, simply to > lessen the load on shared resources. I'm not saying I haven't tossed

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Monday, February 12, 2018 5:59:57 PM CET David Cantrell wrote: > On 02/09/2018 08:34 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller > > wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > >>> It seems that a lot of

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:03 AM, J. Randall Owens < jrowens.fed...@ghiapet.net> wrote: > > When you say 2 releases, are you talking about package or Fedora > releases? I'd favour an approach of keeping all the changes since > release, or since branching might be even better, or since the release >

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 13/02/18 01:00, Michal Schorm wrote: > 5) > The changelogs are long ass hell. > What about keeping just 2 latest releases in it and deleting the rest? > (It will be still kept in GIT history) > 2 releases could be 2-20 entries, depends of work done. > But still it looks short enough for me.

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

I don't think, removing the changelog entirely is a good idea. We do not have suitable replacement. 1) I agree with said. GIT commit messages should describe the work of developer. Thus messages like "typo fix" "revert of revert of merge of ..." "forgot to add new-sources" are common, and should

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 02/09/2018 08:34 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>> It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever >>> in their changelog

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:34:02AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Wherever it lives, this would be read by Bodhi, so there's > > would be need to enter it more than once. And, perhaps a DNF plugin > > could be made to read and display this information for systems > > administrators. > > I fully

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:12:43AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > * Many times people put some useless messages in there, so we > probably don't want to convert old history to git-based changelogs > and have point where we ask people to start writing useful commit > messages. There are lots of

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:39:19 +0100, Petr Stodulka wrote: > > The following: > > %files > > /some/directory/ > > > > is equivalent to: > > %files > > %dir /some/directory > > /some/directory/* > > > > > > There's nothing wrong here. > > > > > > Exactly. IMHO, use of %dir macro for "top" pkg

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:09:25 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > I'm sure that in the past it was difference here :| You are mistaken about that. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 10/02/18 12:54, Kevin Kofler wrote: > David Sommerseth wrote: >> I doubt Koji was primarily built for "does this work?"-builds. It exists >> to build proper packages targeting Fedora repositories. > > But that is the point, to build a proper package: > > do { > try build; > } while (!build

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

I must agree with Kevin that taking every single commit message and putting it into changelog without further tweaking might just produce lots of redundant and not really desired lines in the output. But I think something still can be done. When you invoke `rpkg tag` (the same goes for `fedpkg

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

David Sommerseth wrote: > I doubt Koji was primarily built for "does this work?"-builds. It exists > to build proper packages targeting Fedora repositories. But that is the point, to build a proper package: do { try build; } while (!build succeeded); and the output is a working package. >

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 09/02/18 23:46, Kevin Kofler wrote: > David Sommerseth wrote: >> Doesn't 'fedpkg mockbuild' resolve those test builds? To my knowledge, >> this is fairly close to what koji does under the hood. Then you'll have >> everything tested locally, git tree can be cleaned up and be in a >> reasonable

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

David Sommerseth wrote: > Doesn't 'fedpkg mockbuild' resolve those test builds? To my knowledge, > this is fairly close to what koji does under the hood. Then you'll have > everything tested locally, git tree can be cleaned up and be in a > reasonable shape before being pushed out. I'm surely

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 09/02/18 23:09, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kamil Dudka wrote: >> Would not it be then better to work on this in a staging branch and rework >> those commits before they are pushed to a production branch? I am myself >> not interested in going through commits like "fix a typo", "forgot to bump >>

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Neal Gompa wrote: > Mageia, OpenMandriva, and PLD all generate their changelogs from the > source control system. [snip] > SUSE uses the Open Build Service VCS export to changes files which are > converted into changelog entries at package build time. All these distros have in common that their

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Kamil Dudka wrote: > Would not it be then better to work on this in a staging branch and rework > those commits before they are pushed to a production branch? I am myself > not interested in going through commits like "fix a typo", "forgot to bump > release", "add missing BR", "revert the

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Hello, On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 02/09/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>>

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 09/02/18 16:53 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 09/02/18 08:34 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: Someone else suggested changelogs could be inserted during koji build time. That would be interesting to look into. If a koji build page just showed the Git commit logs since the last build that could

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 09/02/18 08:34 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: Someone else suggested changelogs could be inserted during koji build time. That would be interesting to look into. If a koji build page just showed the Git commit logs since the last build that could be far more useful than showing hundreds of lines

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 13:32 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever > > in their changelog section. > > Is there any

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 9:22 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > > Koji, or fedpkg, or better yet some hook in rpm itself. It's not exactly > rocket science we're talking about here if people are ready to give it a go. > > Neal, doesn't Mageia (and Mandriva) pull package changelogs

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 02/09/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in their changelog section. Is there

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >> It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever >> in their changelog section. >> Is there any reason I should not go and

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Dne 9.2.2018 v 09:21 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Matthew Miller wrote: >> Second, there's package maintainer changelogs. These are really >> redundant with the dist-git log. We don't really need this anymore. >> It's just a chore. > My %changelog entries are not identical to the dist-git commit

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Friday, February 9, 2018 9:21:27 AM CET Kevin Kofler wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > > > Second, there's package maintainer changelogs. These are really > > redundant with the dist-git log. We don't really need this anymore. > > It's just a chore. > > > My %changelog entries are not

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Friday, February 9, 2018 9:25:33 AM CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 08:57 +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:02:10 PM CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 08:57 +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:02:10 PM CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in > > their > > changelog

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

De: "Przemek Klosowski" Hi, > Many environments (corporate, government) actually require keeping track > of this stuff, so addressing it would help the acceptance of Fedora and > Redhat in such environments Then have Koji or Bohdi insert accurate changelogs at build time. Can't be less

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Matthew Miller wrote: > Second, there's package maintainer changelogs. These are really > redundant with the dist-git log. We don't really need this anymore. > It's just a chore. My %changelog entries are not identical to the dist-git commit messages: 1. It often takes me several git commits to

[HEADS UP] Mass-macro-escape in %changelog (was: Escaping macros in %changelog)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 I've went and fixed 493 packages (listed below). If it broke something, please let me know. I checked diff briefly and don't think that I broke anything… Maintainers by package: 389-console mreynolds nhosoi nkinder rmeggins 389-ds-base

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:02:10 PM CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in their > changelog section. > > Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? There's IMO no good reason why you

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 13:32 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever > > in their changelog section. > > Is there any

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 02/08/2018 05:02 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever > in their > changelog section. > > Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? > > %check → %%check > %build → %%build > %whatsoever →

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 2018-02-08, 18:32 GMT, Matthew Miller wrote: > This seems like a lot of churn. If we're going to do this, > let's go big and get rid of RPM changelogs. +1 Matej -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 How

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On 02/08/2018 01:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: This seems like a lot of churn. If we're going to do this, let's go big and get rid of RPM changelogs. When we have a package update, there are basically two different kinds of changelog information. Well, three. [...] Third, though, there's

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever > in their changelog section. > Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? This seems like a lot of churn. If we're going to do this,

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On 8 February 2018 at 17:39, Petr Stodulka wrote: [..] > > There's nothing wrong here. > > > > > > Exactly. IMHO, use of %dir macro for "top" pkg directories is more clean > solution, but > doesn't matter in case the rpm is packaged correctly. > I'm sure that in the past it

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 16:56 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > BTW some massively occurring errors in really big number Fedora of specs. > > Looks like many people don't know that %files entry like: > > /some/directory/ > > does not include

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On 8.2.2018 18:33, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko > wrote: >> BTW some massively occurring errors in really big number Fedora of specs. >> >> Looks like many people don't know that %files entry like: >> >> /some/directory/ >> >>

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > BTW some massively occurring errors in really big number Fedora of specs. > > Looks like many people don't know that %files entry like: > > /some/directory/ > > does not include /some/directory into package but all

Re: Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Looks like many people don't know that %files entry like: > > /some/directory/ > > does not include /some/directory into package but all files and > subdirectories which are in /some/directory. That is incorrect.

Please review use /$ in %files (Was: Re: Escaping macros in %changelog)

BTW some massively occurring errors in really big number Fedora of specs. Looks like many people don't know that %files entry like: /some/directory/ does not include /some/directory into package but all files and subdirectories which are in /some/directory. This is in how many specs such lines

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hello everyone, > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in > their changelog section. > > Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? > > %check → %%check >

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 16:20 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 17:02 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, > > %whatsoever > > in their > > changelog section. > > > > Is there any reason I should not go

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 17:02 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever > in their > changelog section. > > Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? > > %check → %%check > %build → %%build >

Escaping macros in %changelog

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello everyone, It seems that a lot of people have %file, %check, %build, %whatsoever in their changelog section. Is there any reason I should not go and automatically escape them? %check → %%check %build → %%build %whatsoever → %%whatsoever