Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: %{_system_bindir} and such macro (#721)

2019-05-30 Thread Igor Gnatenko
> The actual %meson change @ignatenkobrain landed substitutes Meson's bindir > into the macro file > (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/meson/c/795680bbd10068673580261e134e2f4fbac4072d?branch=master) > - which IMO is better tham %_system_bindir. Yes, and I'm not happy about this because every

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: %{_system_bindir} and such macro (#721)

2019-05-30 Thread Owen Taylor
I'm not opposed to this proposal, but it does seem perhaps like overcomplicating things. Do we have examples where the %_system* macros would differ from the expected FHS values and it would matter? %_libdir is probably the most variable thing across different systems, but BuildRequires: %_lib

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpmsign --signfiles is broken on master (#723)

2019-05-30 Thread David Shea
signFile() in sign/rpmsignfiles.c creates an array of zeroes (https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/master/sign/rpmsignfiles.c#L44) and then passes those zeroes unmodified as the input to imv-evm-util's sign_hash() (https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/master/sign/r

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] macros: Add %version_notilde (#722)

2019-05-30 Thread Igor Gnatenko
@jasontibbitts well, nowadays we try to avoid pushing anything to redhat-rpm-config if it would be useful for others. For some things which need more testing or thinking, redhat-rpm-config should be the first place... But for things like this I don't see any reason to not get it straight in RPM.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] macros: Add %version_notilde (#722)

2019-05-30 Thread Jason Tibbitts
This sort of seems the kind of thing that would go in to redhat-rpm-config (or another distro-specific package) first instead of straight upstream to RPM. But I guess I don't fully understand how new macros are expected to flow into RPM these days. -- You are receiving this because you are su

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] macros: Add %version_notilde (#722)

2019-05-30 Thread Jason Tibbitts
jasontibbitts commented on this pull request. > @@ -335,16 +335,16 @@ package or when debugging this package.\ # A colon separated list of desired locales to be installed; # "all" means install all locale specific files. -# Why give someone a reason to reject this just becau

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: %{_system_bindir} and such macro (#721)

2019-05-30 Thread Jason Tibbitts
This just reveals how redefining of %_bindir (or I guess more correctly they're redefining %_prefix) is not an ideal solution to the problem they're facing. I honestly have no problem with specifying a full path in a build dependency in the case that you can't for some reason specify a package

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] macros: Add %version_notilde (#722)

2019-05-30 Thread Igor Gnatenko
This has been originally part of rust-srpm-macros under %version_no_tilde, but people asked to move to RPM because more and more packagers started to use tilde version. Signed-off-by: Igor Gnatenko You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: %{_system_bindir} and such macro (#721)

2019-05-30 Thread Igor Gnatenko
this would also help with cases where people define their own macro, for example `%meson` used to be a `%{_bindir}/meson`, but I had to change it to hardcode /usr/bin because once you redefine %_bindir, it just breaks... -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply