@jasontibbitts: presumably you meant --queryformat, not POPT, which already can
conditionally test for existence of tags in headers.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/
> Or Fedora could just live with it.
I like this option. :)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/534#issuecomment-416353664___
Various options:
* Fedora could simply patch this downstream; it's just one popt file.
* RPM could leave the Group field in the header empty instead of hardcoding
"Unspecified". Then the popt file could just conditionally include the line.
I've no idea what else would break, though.
* The popt
This reminds me of the [weirdness of `%patch -P 1 2
3`](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/19). Would it useful to
make matters with `%setup` more complicated by permitting options `-b` and `-a`
to have multiple numeric arguments? :wink:
BTW, `debbuild`'s `%autosetup` acknowle
Personally, I would much rather see support for Tags instead of Groups.
Nevertheless, If this will be approved:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Group_Tag
Then this tag does not have any value for Fedora and can be displayed
conditionally as some other tags.
--
You are receiving
Re "... key reason ..."
This is revisionist history without basis in fact by an outsider who was not
present at RedHat
Adding Group by value in package content forces rebuilds to Get It Right!.
The better implementation associates Group values with packages, not within
packages, so that the G
SUSE Linux distributions follow this guideline for categorizing packages with
the Group tag: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Package_group_guidelines
Mageia follows this policy: https://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy
OpenMandriva follows a similar policy to Mageia.
ALT Linux, PLD Linux,
This follows up
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/532#issuecomment-415312692
I agree that Group should not be displayed at all. Fedora does not use it. I am
really curious about the usage in other distributions as @Conan-Kudo mentioned.
--
You are receiving this because you
How can I move this forward?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/469#issuecomment-416191916___
Rpm-maint mailing list
You can use `%autosetup -N -S git` to initialize `%__scm` and then
`%autopatch`/`%apply_patch` continues appropriately. I believe I have a private
specfile somewhere that makes use of such a recipe (plus some manual `git
commit`invocations in between).
--
You are receiving this because you are
Yup, we don't want duplicate implementations of things in Python. Such a
generic utility function deserves an implementation in C and just exported to
Python.
The problem with exposing parseEVR() does not a very nice API make. For one, it
modifies its first argument, and then there's the questi
ignatenkobrain commented on this pull request.
> @@ -126,3 +126,24 @@ def dsSingle(TagN, N, EVR="", Flags=RPMSENSE_ANY):
dsSingle(RPMTAG_CONFLICTNAME, "rpm") corresponds to "Conflicts: rpm"
"""
return ds((N, Flags, EVR), TagN)
+
+def parse_evr(evr_string):
note that there is same
This was originally in in rpmUtils.miscutils.stringToVersion in yum.
http://yum.baseurl.org/api/yum-3.2.26/rpmUtils.miscutils-pysrc.html#stringToVersion
Yum is dead now (and not present for Python3), but this function is useful.
Signed-off-by: Miroslav Suchý
You can view, comment on, or merge th
13 matches
Mail list logo
