For Rust packaging, we would appreciate being able to use rich dependencies
together with architectures. Now we have to simply remove those specific bits
or require everything everywhere.
Same goes to OS handling. you can't use %ifarch in deps =(
--
You are receiving this because you are subsc
> This is a dangerous argument, as by this logic we're required to accept
> anything at all that distros come up with.
I am very much aware of this. But considering this is how we were told to
implement this when we started this, I'm a little frustrated now that the
approach isn't good enough a
> But this one is important enough that I really want this in mainline rpm,
> since without it, it means regular rpm can't handle an entire distro set of
> packages...
This is a dangerous argument, as by this logic we're required to accept
anything at all that distros come up with.
> I think i
Come to think of it, it may be best to rework architecture handling to sit on
top of Provides: (where there's implied Provides: for anything supported by the
CPU).
That way emulators like qemu-static-arm could add Provides: arch(armv7hnl) etc.
so you wouldn't need to force installation of packa
At least in this case, all Ryzen generation 1 and newer CPUs will match on
znver1, so I don't think that'd be a problem with this patch. But I take your
point about the general approach of adding more architectures.
I think it's probably something to explore on improving how we do this
handling
That arch patches are systematically so problematic is to me mostly just
further testimony that we (as in rpm) are doing something seriously wrong in
that department, not to be taken personally.
These are all about instruction set extensions, and those that actually matter
should be exposed via
> I'm just really, really weary and dubious about these architecture tweaks
> because they're so bleeping arbitrary.
I know, I don't particularly love it either, but RPM doesn't support defining
arbitrary architectures and architecture filter mechanisms. Each architecture
that people want to su
Merged #1079 into master.
--
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/1079#event-3051739528___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
Closed #1077 via #1079.
--
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/1077#event-3051739550___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
Just FWIW, I've grown particularly averse to architecture patches because in
the last few years, every single one of them has been nothing but a source of
controversy and grief.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHu
I'm just really, really weary and dubious about these architecture tweaks
because they're so bleeping arbitrary. Looking at gcc manual around znver:
znver1
AMD Family 17h core based CPUs with x86-64 instruction set
support. (This supersets BMI, BMI2, F16C,
Implementation otoh should be pretty straight forward. A simple if at
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/master/lib/rpmfi.c#L995
that does `equal = 1; goto exit;` should do the trick. Passing in the option
without expanding the macro for every file may be a bit more complicated
@mlschroe pushed 1 commit.
4db183db61ca56d035712ca752234aa7c8e8b097 Only look at symlinks in new packages
in fpLookupSubdir
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1071/files/fe90d1990af3809b9f
Merged #949 into master.
--
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/949#event-3051531080___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint
2) would break just about every promise that rpm ever made about file
integrity, I don't really see this as a supportable option. At any rate such a
thing could not be an innocent looking second level of minimize_writes, it'd
need some long and very scary option name.
--
You are receiving this
Macro documentation updated.
--
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/949#issuecomment-588194422___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
d5470ef98b5c858227a0c44b5b14c1b73f6e299e Auto-enable optimizations for
non-rotational disks on Linux
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/949/files/3a776ab506b3f40
@mlschroe pushed 1 commit.
fe90d1990af3809b9f1174bbf77e458435154328 Only look at symlinks in new packages
in fpLookupSubdir
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1071/files/841134ef4697842f1f
Closed #582 via #1064.
--
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/582#event-3051477166___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint
Merged #1064 into master.
--
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/1064#event-3051477151___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
@mlschroe pushed 1 commit.
841134ef4697842f1fb3ef4bb2f3993deb8f2a5c Only look at symlinks in new packages
in fpLookupSubdir
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1071/files/954c491165cacf9156
@Conan-Kudo what I meant is not to release piece of junk, but start with just
this OCAML generators. Once there is something else to be called "stable",
release that as well. But not just random content which is there right now.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this threa
There's a currently inactive feature[1] to minimize writes on SSDs.
I recently realized that it could be extended to even skip computing the
checksums.
That would improve speed not only on SSDs, but also rotating SMR[2] drives
where the performance temporarily degrades with random writes.
What t
Oh yes, we'll need to do the rpmfilesFpLookup() call for TR_REMOVED packages.
Fixing...
--
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/1071#issuecomment-588183440_
At this point in time, `rpm-extras` is set up to be a dumping ground. It's
_not_ set up with any kind of quality things, any process of rationalization of
scripts and such. Without that, we're just going to commit stuff in there
that's not even going to work.
For example, the ALT Linux brp scri
@ignatenkobrain This will be a crap situation to deal with in openSUSE, since
it's going to be a pain to make openSUSE keep this stuff in place correctly.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rp
@pmatilai if you prefer this going away to rpm-extras, I'm willing to establish
releases, installation scripts, and so on and so forth.
--
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-manageme
Yeah it could go to doFoo(), but then I'd actually on a mission to eliminate
the whole doFoo() (replaced by individual functions to do just one thing), so
I'm trying to avoid adding more.
The expansion logic around g/gn could and probably should be handled centrally
in the expandMacros() call-si
May be it is worth pointing out the auto detection in the macros file for both
%_minimize_writes and %_flush_io. May be with a sentence like "When running on
non-rotational disk only and the macro is not set this is done automatically".
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to th
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -109,6 +121,27 @@ static char *getMntPoint(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
return res;
}
+static int getRotational(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
+{
+int rotational = 1;/* Be a good pessimist, assume the worst */
+#if defined(__l
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
3a776ab506b3f4043947a4121f6aaf4eacbb6739 Auto-enable optimizations for
non-rotational disks on Linux
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/949/files/ae0c9e7c007ee7a
This crashes at the "reinstall 1" test with the following (from valgrind):
> fprint.c:262:12: runtime error: member access within null pointer of type
> 'const struct fingerPrint'
==943715== Invalid read of size 4
==943715==at 0x4923867: fpHashFunction (fprint.c:262)
==943715==by 0x492777
As it now expands the argument I think it should be handled in doFoo().
--
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/1064#issuecomment-588161577__
mlschroe commented on this pull request.
> @@ -109,6 +121,27 @@ static char *getMntPoint(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
return res;
}
+static int getRotational(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
+{
+int rotational = 1;/* Be a good pessimist, assume the worst */
+#if defined(__l
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -109,6 +121,27 @@ static char *getMntPoint(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
return res;
}
+static int getRotational(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
+{
+int rotational = 1;/* Be a good pessimist, assume the worst */
+#if defined(__l
@mlschroe pushed 1 commit.
954c491165cacf9156d2e4b0f3afaaaef9c3d529 Only look at symlinks in new packages
in fpLookupSubdir
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1071/files/1732cc787d6f508019
mlschroe commented on this pull request.
> pi = rpmtsiInit(ts);
while ((p = rpmtsiNext(pi, 0)) != NULL) {
fingerPrint *fpList;
(void) rpmsqPoll();
+ if (rpmteType(p) == TR_REMOVED)
+ continue; /* we are only interested in new packages */
Oh,
Renamed to %{macrobody:..} and argument expanded now.
--
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/1064#issuecomment-588154899
mlschroe commented on this pull request.
> @@ -109,6 +121,27 @@ static char *getMntPoint(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
return res;
}
+static int getRotational(const char *dirName, dev_t dev)
+{
+int rotational = 1;/* Be a good pessimist, assume the worst */
+#if defined(__l
pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> pi = rpmtsiInit(ts);
while ((p = rpmtsiNext(pi, 0)) != NULL) {
fingerPrint *fpList;
(void) rpmsqPoll();
+ if (rpmteType(p) == TR_REMOVED)
+ continue; /* we are only interested in new packages */
Why
I've added a commit that makes the code only consider symlinks. Florian, any
objections to this?
--
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/1071#issuecomment-588151243
@mlschroe pushed 1 commit.
1732cc787d6f508019edc7c455aa02d9b9ad78e6 Only look at symlinks in new packages
in fpLookupSubdir
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1071/files/1c9343142a728dce57
Also rebased while at it.
--
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/949#issuecomment-588144511___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rp
Realized %_minimize_writes had 0 as default, fixed in latest push. Also
explained the macro config logic a bit in the commit. I guess this is as ready
to be lifted from RFC status.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on Gi
@pmatilai pushed 2 commits.
79841eed95f164fd8c63c57b08643e468d74638d Only enable flush_io and
minimize_writes on positive values
1bd9b801b6c5a0a4f18de462bb8009c1374e8aff Auto-enable optimizations for
non-rotational disks on Linux
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this
Also as a reminder to us all, the final commit with version update is missing
here, and along with that, rpm_version_info needs to be updated. There's at
least one new API added so that needs to be reflected as well.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
Looking at the semaphoreci failure, there's a bunch of these:
> +++ /opt/rpm/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/443/stderr 2020-02-18
> 07:51:48.219806927 +
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +/opt/rpm/tests/rpmtests.dir/at-groups/443/test-source: line 48: python:
> command not found
Pulling commit d15ea79139304e
Sorry about that, but full rewrite like this would be about the best time there
is for such a move. So it makes sense to at least consider that option right
now.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://githu
Merged #1076 into master.
--
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/1076#event-3050657925___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
49 matches
Mail list logo
