Re: A question about md5 being 00000000000000000000000000000000

> On Oct 26, 2017, at 1:18 PM, zhang j wrote: > > Hi All, > > I have a question about md5sum of a 0 sized file. The md5sum of a 0 sized > file built using rpm 5.4 on RHE 7 is . If do > 'rpm -qp --dump' of that rpm, the md5sum is shown >

Re: pthread locking question

> On Oct 15, 2017, at 4:06 AM, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz wrote: > > On Sunday 15 of October 2017, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz wrote: >> Hi. >> >> Is this lock supposed to be locked/unlocked before initialization? > > Ok, this was missing > > --- rpmio/rpmsq.c~ 2017-10-15

RPM+MQTT in rpm-5.4.18 ...

rpm-5.4.18 (soon) will embed the paho-mqtt client to do MQTT messaging. I will likely do a snapshot of 5.4.18 as soon as I haul out some MQTT debugging trash and repair portability damage. TL;DR Don't install paho-mqtt-1.1.0 and/or build rpm-5.4.18 --without-mqtt and ignore the rest of

Re: About rpm's SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES

On Jul 5, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Robert Yang wrote: > Hi, > > I'm using rpm 5.4.16, it seems that --nosignature has been disabled > as system.h shows: > #undef SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES > Yes. YL;DR Change SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES back to whatever you wish. > So that rpm --nosignature doesn't work,

Re: [Rpm-ecosystem] Using rpm db to track unneeded packages

On Apr 1, 2016, at 9:03 AM, devzero2000 wrote: > No bad idea > > The semantics of "installed through dependencies" is less useful than one might imagine. The intent is usually to permit automatic uninstall extensions when some explicitly chosen package is uninstalled as in "unneeded". The

rpm-5.4.16-0.20160321.src.rpm, take 3

There is a 3rd snapshot release of rpm-5.4.16 now available at http://rpm5.org/files/rpm/rpm-5.4/SNAPSHOT//rpm-5.4.16-0.20160321.src.rpm This addresses the following issues: 1) mongoc.h needed #include to rebuild with PLD configuration 2) build with or without in "system.h"

Re: rpm-5.4.16 snapshot, take 2

PORT_I18NSTRING_TYPE next. hth 73 de Jeff On Mar 18, 2016, at 3:49 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: > I have uploaded another snapshot release that addresses > all the issues you have reported: > > rpm-5.4.16-0.20160318.src.rpm > > The issue of garbled text is both locale and

rpm-5.4.16 snapshot

There is a snapshot release of rpm-5.4.16 now available at http://rpm5.org/files/rpm/rpm-5.4/SNAPSHOT/rpm-5.4.16-0.20160315.src.rpm This is the first SRPM built by itself that is headed for release in the next few weeks that is being provided as a public reference point for integration

EVR issues: set:versions, epoch-as-string, now twiddle-in-version

OK, adoption of the ancient SuSE twiddle-in-version patch by @rpm.org has now added yet a 3rd incompatibility that needs to be addressed within what is commonly known as rpmvercmp (aside) The designator rpmvercmp is already horrendously misleading because its the name of the comparison routine

Fwd: EVR issues: set:versions, epoch-as-string, now twiddle-in-version

message: From: Jeff Johnson n3npq@gmail.com Subject: EVR issues: set:versions, epoch-as-string, now twiddle-in-version Date: April 23, 2012 10:16:28 AM EDT To: rpm-devel@rpm5.org OK, adoption of the ancient SuSE twiddle-in-version patch by @rpm.org has now added yet a 3rd incompatibility

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ rpmchecksig.c rpm/rpmio/ mac...

Umm … whatever. I don't mind living with this patch: but the precedent (if continued) will force umask(2) wrapping of every system call that sets a file mode, and also for library functions like mkstemp(3), if consistently applied everywhere. That end-point -- controlling for umask(2)

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ rpmchecksig.c rpm/rpmio/ mac...

On Sep 30, 2011, at 9:12 AM, devzero2000 wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Jeff Johnson n3npq@gmail.com wrote: Umm … whatever. I don't mind living with this patch: but the precedent (if continued) will force umask(2) wrapping of every system call that sets a file mode, and also

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ rpmchecksig.c rpm/rpmio/ mac...

On Sep 30, 2011, at 9:16 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: On Sep 30, 2011, at 9:12 AM, devzero2000 wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Jeff Johnson n3npq@gmail.com wrote: Umm … whatever. I don't mind living with this patch: but the precedent (if continued) will force umask(2

Re: script for BuildRequires to graphviz?

On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tim Mooney wrote: In regard to: Re: script for BuildRequires to graphviz?, Jeff Johnson said...: On Sep 15, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Tim Mooney wrote: All- Before I re-invent the (possibly simple) wheel

Re: script for BuildRequires to graphviz?

On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Tim Mooney wrote: All- Before I re-invent the (possibly simple) wheel, I have a vague recollection of seeing a script that can take a collection of spec files and build a directed graph from the BuildRequires, for graphing in something like graphviz.

Re: script for BuildRequires to graphviz?

On Sep 15, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Tim Mooney wrote: All- Before I re-invent the (possibly simple) wheel, I have a vague recollection of seeing a script that can take a collection of spec files and build a directed graph from

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/build/ parsePrep.c rpm/ configure.ac rpm/m...

Could you push all these changes back to the rpm-5_4 branch too please? That's where the buildbot's are running, and I am active. Otherwise these changes are gonna reside on HEAD until a ROADMAP or participation exists, and that isn't likely soon. Thanks! 73 de Jeff On Sep 6, 2011, at 10:41

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/build/ parsePrep.c rpm/ configure.ac rpm/m...

On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:05 AM, devzero2000 wrote: Done : lzip and lrzip support are in HEAD and in the 5_4 Branch. Tomorrow i will search if there are some my patch that live only in HEAD and i will merge in 5_4 as well. Best Regards BTW, the buildbot master is now running at

Re: [CVS] RPM: popt/ CHANGES popthelp.c system.h test1.c

Please none of this format crap just to conform with oddball platforms. There's literally no usage case for long long in POPT: if you don't have long long and %lld, then error out the routines or maintain the patch in MingW. And there are like *THREE* different markups for UNUSED now, none of

Re: [CVS] RPM: popt/ CHANGES popt.c system.h

I'd rather see all the AutoCrap ripped out then deal with dueling make processes. POPT is insanely *by the book* portable and doesn't need all this Have it your own way! stuff. Particularly when the whole build process starts to diverge into dueling builds. 73 de Jeff On Sep 5, 2011, at 7:46

Re: [CVS] RPM: popt/ CHANGES popthelp.c test1.c

There's only a single (test1.c doesn't count) use for LONG_LONG_FORMAT: $ grep LONG_LONG_FORMAT *.[ch] popthelp.c: le += sprintf(le, % LONG_LONG_FORMAT, arg.longlongp[0]); system.h:#define LONG_LONG_FORMAT I64d system.h:#define LONG_LONG_FORMAT lld

Re: [CVS] RPM: popt/ CHANGES popt.c system.h

On Sep 5, 2011, at 8:56 AM, devzero2000 wrote: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: I'd rather see all the AutoCrap ripped out then deal with dueling make processes. POPT is insanely *by the book* portable and doesn't need all this Have it your own way! stuff

Fwd: current status of ruby bindings in rpm5 (head) / latest stable ?

Begin forwarded message: On Monday 22 August 2011, 12:57:35, Anders F Björklund wrote: Tobias Gerschner wrote: What's the state of ruby bindings in rpm5? The last discussion I remember was centered around the absence of an usable API for ruby = 1.9. There are no ruby bindings in

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/build/ parseChangelog.c parseFile...

Again we're working at cross purposes: %clean was removed as part of spec file syntax in 2007. And #ifdef RPM_VENDOR_MANDRIVA is going to be phased out … *shrug* 73 de Jeff On Aug 25, 2011, at 2:35 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: RPM Package Manager, CVS Repository

Re: current status of ruby bindings in rpm5 (head) / latest stable ?

On Aug 22, 2011, at 6:57 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Tobias Gerschner wrote: What's the state of ruby bindings in rpm5? The last discussion I remember was centered around the absence of an usable API for ruby = 1.9. There are no ruby bindings in rpm5, only ruby embedding… The

Re: current status of ruby bindings in rpm5 (head) / latest stable ?

On Aug 22, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson wrote: (the old bindings were GPL, rather than LGPL like python) Yes: the *existing* (and largely orphaned/defunct afaik: the project was seeking a new maintainer a couple years back and GPL instead of LGPL prevented

Re: current status of ruby bindings in rpm5 (head) / latest stable ?

On Aug 22, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Yup: the only reason for including python/* and perl/* and js/* and ruby/* and tcl/* is to provide one-stop-shopping. The js/* is still the preferred/mandatory scripting, yes ? Its preferred by me still yes. And with js-1.8.5 its

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/rpmio/ rpmsq.c

will do mdv#62262 in the future. hth 73 de Jeff Messaggio originale Da: Jeff Johnson Inviato: 06/08/2011, 21:58 A: rpm-...@rpm5.org Oggetto: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/rpmio/ rpmsq.c RPM Package Manager, CVS Repository http://rpm5.org/cvs

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all, So I finally got around to building rpm 5.4.1 for SuSE. I still have the patches (reformatted), but I am not using them for this build. I'm getting this error: http://slexy.org/view/s2XO5ULWb4 The _globalI issue (assuming I have

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Robert Xu wrote: SHort answer: You won't miss a thing if you change your rpm.spec to do --without-semanage instead. Got further after this :) (I don't even know what SuSE uses semanage in RPM for anyway...) I've ended up

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 7:42 PM, Robert Xu wrote: that's... not supposed to happen, right? Yes. db3 is just a build directory with a configure wrapper (i.e. its not an AutoFu ./configure just a stub to filter augments and reinvade ../db/dist/configure Appears I nuked db3 (and

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 7:43 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 19:42, Robert Xu rob...@gmail.com wrote: ++ searching location: internal -- skipping not existing local sub-directory: db3 configure: error: unable to find internal Berkeley-DB library error: Bad exit status from

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Success! Good. ++ searching location: internal -- skipping not existing local sub-directory: db3/sql configure: error: unable to find internal Berkeley-DB (+SQLite3) library error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.7lmaLM (%build)

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:30 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 20:51, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: Ah sorry: from memory this is mkdir -p db3/sql to fix works! thanks Java is an atrocity … cvs is just mildly senile … works fine if speak slowly … hehe

Re: building rpm 5.4.1

On Jul 31, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 21:54, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: A symlink would fix that … so would a patch: dbsql.h is under db3 somewhere. hm... I have db3/dbsql, but not db3/dbsql.h… cd db3 make -n install /tmp/foo

Re: What should the contents of /etc/rpm/platform be ?

whose values cannot be relied on, particularly on non-linux platforms. With this, I now have the smart package manager working. Congrats! 73 de Jeff -- Sriram On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:59 PM, Tim Mooney wrote: In regard

Re: What should the contents of /etc/rpm/platform be ?

On Jul 22, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: Hi: I'm facing a problem with the smart package manager downloading the createrepo based metadata, but not showing me any packages. Anders F Bjorklund on the smart package manager mailing list gave a few pointers, most of which I'd

Re: What should the contents of /etc/rpm/platform be ?

On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:59 PM, Tim Mooney wrote: In regard to: What should the contents of /etc/rpm/platform be ?, Sriram...: sriram@ram-oi:/usr/src/rpm/RPMS/i86pc$ uname -a SunOS ram-oi 5.11 oi_147 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris sriram@ram-oi:/usr/src/rpm/RPMS/i86pc$ ls /usr/src/rpm/RPMS/i86pc/

Re: About Have it your own way!

On Jul 16, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: Hi Jeff, I've sometimes seen your responses posts where you talk about Have it your won way!. There are many deep meanings of my use of that phrase that I'm not going to be able to describe. But some of the meanings you know quite

Re: About Have it your own way!

On Jul 16, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: Telling people what they want to hear is less effort than attempting to explain other or better alternatives. And so I end up describing implementations that I know are wrong/deficient and that I don't personally believe in or have

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ transaction.c

On Jul 13, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: Passing keys Somewhere Else Instead isn't needed either: rpmdbMireApply() is perfectly capable of being used intelligently, to perform a bullshit test that isn't necessary at all, however you wish. Would this be more acceptable? :)

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ transaction.c

On Jul 13, 2011, at 2:56 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: So back up a bit, look at the code path on which this bullshit test is being performed, think a bit, and just rip the entire test out. Yeah, not disagreeing with you on that one.. :) Good. Then haul out the trash please. What

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ transaction.c

This isn't at all the right approach because its doesn't scale. You have changed a single high performing rpmdb access that applies patterns to keys only, and added a hack-o-round that then goes and loads multiple headers repeatedly to try and adjust the set returned by the original access to fit

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ transaction.c

On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: 2011/7/12 Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com: This isn't at all the right approach because its doesn't scale. You have changed a single high performing rpmdb access that applies patterns to keys only, and added a hack-o-round that then goes

Distepoch identification (was Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/lib/ transaction.c)

Lemme split this into 2 threads to try to address two twisted issues properly. The other thread will be Transaction sanity checks On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:48 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: You need to figure a better *RE pattern, not whack in lots of gunky code to fix it somehow. Yes, I kinda

Re: Simple? query question

On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: I'm working on multilib/multiarch support in the oe-core stuff. And I've hit an issue. I'm trying to query for a package of a specific arch. rpm -q zlib returns: zlib-1.2.5-r0.x86_64 if I do: rpm -q zlib-1.2.5 or zlib-1.2.5-r0

Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files

On Jun 29, 2011, at 8:45 AM, Tim Mooney wrote: In regard to: R: Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files, pinto.elia@gmail...: Perhaps OT, but just a my random thought about this thread about rpm5 and berkley DB. most of which is discussed here is very similar, or equal sometime, on

Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files

On Jun 29, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Tim Mooney wrote: In regard to: Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files, Jeff Johnson said...: Meanwhile: Do you agree that increasing mmap size is the most important performance related tunable? First, although I have indeed learned a lot about BDB from

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/ CHANGES configure.ac rpm/tools/ dbconvert.c

Nothing wrong with the patch per se but there's more than testing for sys/endian.h that needs to be done. There's breakage in colliding WORDS_BIGENDIAN et al, beecrypt has internal m4 tests that set WORDS_BIGENDIAN, and there are platforms that are missing endian.h entirely but need

Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files

On Jun 28, 2011, at 1:00 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: I was hoping someone can help me understand what is happening and how to address it for our embedded system needs. For reference: http://bugzilla.pokylinux.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1174 from the above, the complaint is: When using

Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files

On Jun 28, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: You probably want to enable automatic log removal, ie. look at Db_open() in URPM: http://svn.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/soft/rpm/perl-URPM/trunk/URPM.xs?revision=272986view=markup For where it's actually gets enabled, look

Re: RPM DB, Berkley DB and journal files

On Jun 28, 2011, at 5:09 PM, pinto.e...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps OT, but just a my random thought about this thread about rpm5 and berkley DB. most of which is discussed here is very similar, or equal sometime, on similar question on openldap. Apparently strange but not so quite if

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/ CHANGES cpu-os-macros.tar.gz

The right fix here -- almost 4+ years after being phased out -- is to remove the cpu-os-macros.tar.gz tar ball in cvs. There's no way that rpm itself could or should enumerate the CPU enumeration faced with the proliferation of architectures. Nor has there ever been anything useful information

Re: Yocto, directory ownership, RPM deb packaging

On Jun 10, 2011, at 11:25 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: I was wondering because we could optionally enable it as a form of QA. Otherwise we'll have to dump the data from the RPM packages and externally run QA… OK better QA is the goaal. The choices are QA by failing/correcting builds

Re: Yocto, directory ownership, RPM deb packaging

On Jun 10, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: I've been trying to reconcile the behavior between rpm and deb packages in the way their directories are handled. In rpm, we can set the directories to own in various ways. If there is a conflict between two packages owning the same directory

Re: About ACL_FIRST_ENTRY, etc in rpm-5.3.11

On Jun 9, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: The Solaris world doesn't have these ACL_TYPE definitions at /usr/include/sys/acl.h or elsewhere. Hmmm ... will look. I presume that rpmacl is needed for ensuring that the user account has the right level of access, etc. Any

Re: A syntax (?) question

On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:28 PM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: Another C n00b question: I faced this: libtool: link: gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC -Wl,-z -Wl,text -Wl,-h -Wl,librpmmisc-5.3.so -o .libs/librpmmisc-5.3.so .libs/librpmmisc.o -R/workspace/rpm/rpm_5_3_11/beecrypt/.libs -R/usr/sfw/lib

Re: How do I get the rpm build to see the external db and dbsql files ?

On Jun 9, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: I have bdb 5.1.19 installed at /workspace/altopt/ (with sub folders being include, bin, lib, etc). Note that there is a ABI breakage between db-5.1.19 - db-5.1.25. You might want to start using db-5.1.25 to avoid later pain. \ ABI breakage

Re: How do I get the rpm build to see the external db and dbsql files ?

On Jun 9, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: On Jun 9, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Sriram Narayanan wrote: I have bdb 5.1.19 installed at /workspace/altopt/ (with sub folders being include, bin, lib, etc). Note

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES configure.ac rpm/macros/ macros.in

The AutoFu is perfectly okay, but there's deeper design problems here. First of, there's additional configuration that needs to be automated. There are 2 usage cases, one for files, the other for package scriptlets, for bash --rpm-requires 1) for files The files have only %_foo_requires,

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/ CHANGES configure.ac rpm/macros/ macros.in

Please note that this also just broke every build in devtool.conf (because an additional build argument, with path to a bash enabled with --rpm-requires is added. There's a point at which increasingly precise AutoFu and Have it your own way! configuration only increases the difficulty of

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/js/ rpmaug-js.c rpmbc-js.c rpmbf-js.c rpmcudf-js.c rpmd...

patch -p0 '@@ .' Index: rpm/js/rpmaug-js.c $ cvs diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 rpmaug-js.c --- rpm/js/rpmaug-js.c 2 Apr 2011 02:01:53 - 1.12 +++ rpm/js/rpmaug-js.c 3 Jun 2011 16:32:15 -

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/js/ rpmaug-js.c rpmbc-js.c rpmbf-js.c rpmcudf-js.c rpmd...

On Jun 3, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: 2011/6/3 Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com: Talk to me first *PLEASE* ... nothing at all wrong with what you are doing _EXCEPT_ you aren't talking. Yeah, I just realised that I left it quite broken earlier and figured that I'd might as well

Re: annoying yet?

On May 31, 2011, at 3:26 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all (again), This... patch is confusing me. Especially since it changes between rpm4.8 and rpm4.9, I do not know where to look: https://github.com/devzero2000/RPM/commit/1d6e4fcd667472dc9d252194b9a12a390aa32abb There's not really much

Re: annoying yet?

On May 31, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 16:01, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: There's not really much happening in this patch. The hardest part of a build is getting the %files manifest correct. All the patch does is try to _ALSO_ do the checkfiles

Re: ugly suse build.diff

On May 29, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all, Would like some words of wisdom ( or such ) on this patch: https://github.com/devzero2000/RPM/commit/cfdfc6e358c47d0b6fef2fe4f99d67ca7922ffed Most of this patch is attempting to automate suse identification and add default packaging

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

The claim mapping is not ordered actually isn't true. Header tags _ARE_ ordered, just the collation isn't what no brainer conversions into native data types are implementing. But it hardly matters with spewage, fewer tokens to ask about KISS simplicity trumps everything else in FL/OSS. 73 de

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

On May 27, 2011, at 8:53 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson wrote: The claim mapping is not ordered actually isn't true. Header tags _ARE_ ordered, just the collation isn't what no brainer conversions into native data types are implementing. I was referring to the actual

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

On May 27, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson: Header tags _ARE_ ordered, just the collation isn't what no brainer conversions into native data types are implementing. And the collation is integer numeric based on tag numbers. Okay. Does this tag ordering need

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/rpmdb/ fprint.c

Just FYI: These are deep internal interfaces which should NOT be relied on within RPM. I.e. if you're segfaulting here you need an RPM upgrade, not a patch. The fingerprinting code is NOT a supportable API, and IS being actively refactored to be replaced and eliminated. This

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/rpmdb/ rpmdb.c

Nice! Still needs to be done somewhere else though for performance. Nothing at all wrong with this patch, just SHOULD be done deeper in dbiFindMatches() for highest performing, most general, etc etc. 73 de Jeff On May 27, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: RPM Package Manager, CVS

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/rpmdb/ fprint.c

On May 27, 2011, at 11:04 AM, devzero2000 wrote: On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: Just FYI: These are deep internal interfaces which should NOT be relied on within RPM. I.e. if you're segfaulting here you need an RPM upgrade, not a patch

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_3: rpm/rpmdb/ rpmdb.c

On May 27, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: 2011/5/27 Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com: Nice! \o/ Still needs to be done somewhere else though for performance. Nothing at all wrong with this patch, just SHOULD be done deeper in dbiFindMatches() for highest performing, most general

Re: so now that we've established weakdeps on rpm5...

On May 25, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Robert Xu wrote: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 03:48, devzero2000 pinto.e...@gmail.com wrote: FWIW, i have forgotten to tell that the SUSE rpm spec of rpm 4.9.0 122.1 contain PreReq: %insserv_prereq %fillup_prereq permissions I would hope that Requires

Re: so now that we've established weakdeps on rpm5...

On May 24, 2011, at 7:02 AM, Klaus Kaempf wrote: * Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com [May 24. 2011 12:33]: And this information is dynamic and should come from an online service and not be put into the package, where its 'frozen' This is of course exactly the opposite of what you said here

Re: so now that we've established weakdeps on rpm5...

On May 24, 2011, at 7:06 AM, Klaus Kaempf wrote: LOL - anyways, I'm the wrong person to ask. This should go to the opensuse community. My cat knows more about RPM than community does. And just miaows in reply ... 73 de Jeff smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES devtool.conf

There's a better and simpler fix (for beecrypt) by not including the C++ stubs in a -lbeecrypt. The fix is here (beecrypt/Makefile.am) commenting out cppglue.cxx: libbeecrypt_la_SOURCES = aes.c base64.c beecrypt.c blockmode.c blockpad.c blowfish.c dhies.c dldp.c dlkp.c dlpk.c dlsvdp-dh.c dsa.c

Re: so now that we've established weakdeps on rpm5...

On May 24, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Robert Xu wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 06:42, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: PreReq: was made equivalkent to Requires: in 2001 or so. Isn't there like Requires(pre)? Or is that still the same? Requires(pre) is entirely unrelated to PreReq

Re: weak deps already done, right?

On May 23, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Klaus Kaempf wrote: * Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com [May 22. 2011 22:04]: I see no reason for anything _EXCEPT_ the usual PRCO Gang Of Four: Provides: Requires: Conflicts: Obsoletes: From a pure RPM pov, I fully agree. Well I realize

Re: so now that we've established weakdeps on rpm5...

On May 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi, So now that it's clarified that RPMSENSE_MISSINGOK works... (I can throw out this patch! https://github.com/devzero2000/RPM/commit/21ee982d1655c3d8528ed4a32e821aec775ebe14) Yes you shouldn't need that patch with @rpm5.org. So... now

Re: weak deps already done, right?

On May 22, 2011, at 2:31 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi, Weak Dependencies like Suggests, Recommends, Enhances, Supplements, and Requires(missingok) are implemented already into RPM5, right? Just double-checking. The flags and tags are reserved but again, there's sharp disagreement about the

Re: weak deps already done, right?

On May 22, 2011, at 3:48 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 15:06, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: The flags and tags are reserved but again, there's sharp disagreement about the need for weak dependencies ala SuSE. At the time weak dependencies were added

Re: weak deps already done, right?

On May 22, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 15:44, pinto.e...@gmail.com pinto.e...@gmail.com wrote: In general this is a difficult question to answer, for my knowledge. There is not clear semantic for the weak deps, in other package management system the

Re: when not using internal generator...

On May 22, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all, SuSE doesn't like using an internal generator. Figures. SuSE and Mandriva just gotta be different yes. The difference is at the product level with multilib, not in how packages are built. The internal ELF generator is known reliable

Re: when not using internal generator...

On May 22, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On May 22, 2011, at 22:19, Jeff Johnson n3...@mac.com wrote: On May 22, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all, SuSE doesn't like using an internal generator. Figures. SuSE and Mandriva just gotta be different yes

Re: when not using internal generator...

On May 22, 2011, at 10:52 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: Only took 6 years ... *shrug* The important thing to look for here is whether dependcies are sorted: rpm -qp --requires foo*.rpm with package built by rpm-4.9.0. If not sorted, the job isn't finished yet. hth 73 de Jeff

Re: split formats.c?

On May 21, 2011, at 8:02 PM, Robert Xu wrote: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 19:55, Per Øyvind Karlsen pkarl...@rpm5.org wrote: 2011/5/22 Robert Xu rob...@gmail.com: Hi all, I've been going through opensuse patches with quilt (sorry Jeff, I couldn't wait to build RPM5, but didn't want to throw

Re: split formats.c?

On May 21, 2011, at 6:56 PM, Robert Xu wrote: Hi all, I've been going through opensuse patches with quilt (sorry Jeff, I couldn't wait to build RPM5, but didn't want to throw away whatever SuSE does completely)... I have a build on OpenSUSE sitting idle in a VM somewhere anytime you want.

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/scripts/ find-debuginfo.sh

Nice! You beat me to the fix ;-) I was staring at just how gawd awful find-debuginfo.sh really is. That script is really really twisty and in need of writing in C, not shell. 73 de Jeff On May 18, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Pinto Elia wrote: RPM Package Manager, CVS Repository

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm-5_4: rpm/tools/ Makefile.am

The right fix is likely to add $(RPMDB_LDADD_COMMON) Note that I rewrote dbconver.c somewhat somewhere. I forget whethere I checked the changes in at all, but I most certainly did NOT check it into the rpm-5_3 branch because of the unknown production risk there when deployed into Cooker

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ CHANGES rpm/rpmio/ iosm.c

FYI: This code (i.e. 3 1-line changes) was responsible for a 10% performance increase in wall-clock install time. You've also had personabl experience why Fsync (close byt) isn't/wans't the right implementation (was requested by Russell Coker for xfs hardening). Study carefully, MADV_DONTNEED

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

Nothing wrong with this patch whatsoever. But do note that there is a common API and naming in hdrfmt.c prepared for a major trash hauling one of these days. The additional integer argument breaks the rule and it literally does not matter until all the trash gets hauled. The --queryformat code

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

Should the date in %changelog also be changed? Or leave bad enuf alone for status quo ante compatibility? BTW, RPM got reamed years ago because %changelog isn't standard, been on my todo++ since forever. 73 de Jeff On May 12, 2011, at 2:34 AM, Anders F. Björklund wrote: RPM Package Manager,

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/scripts/ wnh_other_yaml wnh_primary_yaml

Last month I was adding types for dates in JSON. I have mixed feelings for adding types to metadata. The easy types like integers and time/date just make it harder to code because of additional special cases (instead of essentiallt treatin all integers as network order uint32_t and leave the

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ devtool.conf

On May 12, 2011, at 3:35 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson wrote: No idea whether it works, but at least it seems to build... ... the point being that libtsan1 is headed for the bit bucket anyways, and openssl is so so so much easier to use than gnutls (but only by a hair's

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ hdrfmt.c

On May 12, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson wrote: Should the date in %changelog also be changed? You mean for the .spec input ? Wouldn't that invalidate all spec files, unless it's made optional (either/or) ? Yep, incompatible (invalidate seems to hint

What threading model for RPM? (was Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ devtool.conf)

On May 12, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote: Jeff Johnson wrote: One other problem is that the tools are using $(OPENMP_CFLAGS) but not $(OPENMP_LIBS), which leads to missing symbols at runtime: dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: _GOMP_parallel_start One

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ devtool.conf

I'll snip the libtasn1 dependency out if it causes pain ... ... its an implicit dependency from rpm - neon - gnutls - libtasn1 which can be flipped into --with-openssl in a flash now that --with-neon=internal is in place. Note neon 0.29.5 - 0.29.6 looms on the todo++ list ... ... no

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/ devtool.conf

On May 11, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote: No idea whether it works, but at least it seems to build... From my investigations with TSS and TCG and TPM and MTM which led me to a decision to attempt a ASN.1 embedding not only into RPM libraries but also into the *.rpm/*.wdj

Re: [CVS] RPM: rpm/rpmdb/ rpmdb.h

This isn't your code. Leave it be. WTF does C++ typecasting have to do with anything? Do we go through a repeat of last week? Again? 73 de Jeff On May 10, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote: RPM Package Manager, CVS Repository http://rpm5.org/cvs/

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >