8:22 a.m.
I do some macro gymnastics with vym to prevent it Requiring a perl
module that's named one thing in SuSE and another in Fedora. With my
latest f17 build, that stopped working, while builds of the same code
and spec on f15 and f16 seem to be ok. Did rpm's behaviour change?
-J
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
8:42 a.m.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jon Ciesla <limb(a)jcomserv.net> wrote:
I do some macro gymnastics with vym to prevent it Requiring a perl
module
that's named one thing in SuSE and another in Fedora. With my latest f17
build, that stopped working, while builds of the same code and spec on f15
and f16 seem to be ok. Did rpm's behaviour change?
The perl_default_filter macro changed with perl 5.14. We're now using
rpm's native __requires_exclude macro (and friends) instead of the
slightly hacky filter_setup stuff. Ideally, we'd drop the
filter_setup/filter_from_requires entirely, but to keep a single spec
compatible with all current fedora branches, you can do:
--- vym.spec.orig 2011-07-20 19:58:57.000000000 +0200
+++ vym.spec 2011-08-18 15:37:06.427529132 +0200
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
%filter_from_requires /^perl(BugzillaClient)$/d
%?perl_default_filter
}
+%global __requires_exclude
%{?__requires_exclude:%__requires_exclude|}perl\\(BugzillaClient\\)
Requires: perl-BZ-Client
%description
--
Iain.
8:47 a.m.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Iain Arnell <iarnell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jon Ciesla <limb(a)jcomserv.net>
wrote:
> I do some macro gymnastics with vym to prevent it Requiring a perl module
> that's named one thing in SuSE and another in Fedora. With my latest f17
> build, that stopped working, while builds of the same code and spec on f15
> and f16 seem to be ok. Did rpm's behaviour change?
The perl_default_filter macro changed with perl 5.14. We're now using
rpm's native __requires_exclude macro (and friends) instead of the
slightly hacky filter_setup stuff. Ideally, we'd drop the
filter_setup/filter_from_requires entirely, but to keep a single spec
compatible with all current fedora branches, you can do:
--- vym.spec.orig 2011-07-20 19:58:57.000000000 +0200
+++ vym.spec 2011-08-18 15:37:06.427529132 +0200
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
%filter_from_requires /^perl(BugzillaClient)$/d
%?perl_default_filter
}
+%global __requires_exclude
%{?__requires_exclude:%__requires_exclude|}perl\\(BugzillaClient\\)
^ That should be one line, of course.
And I noticed that you already have a __requires_exclude. But at the
minute, it *must* come after perl_default_filter.
--
Iain.
9:17 a.m.
Iain Arnell wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Iain Arnell
<iarnell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jon Ciesla <limb(a)jcomserv.net> wrote:
>
>> I do some macro gymnastics with vym to prevent it Requiring a perl module
>> that's named one thing in SuSE and another in Fedora. With my latest f17
>> build, that stopped working, while builds of the same code and spec on f15
>> and f16 seem to be ok. Did rpm's behaviour change?
>>
> The perl_default_filter macro changed with perl 5.14. We're now using
> rpm's native __requires_exclude macro (and friends) instead of the
> slightly hacky filter_setup stuff. Ideally, we'd drop the
> filter_setup/filter_from_requires entirely, but to keep a single spec
> compatible with all current fedora branches, you can do:
>
> --- vym.spec.orig 2011-07-20 19:58:57.000000000 +0200
> +++ vym.spec 2011-08-18 15:37:06.427529132 +0200
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> %filter_from_requires /^perl(BugzillaClient)$/d
> %?perl_default_filter
> }
> +%global __requires_exclude
> %{?__requires_exclude:%__requires_exclude|}perl\\(BugzillaClient\\)
>
^ That should be one line, of course.
And I noticed that you already have a __requires_exclude. But at the
minute, it *must* come after perl_default_filter.
Worked like a charm, thanks very much!
-J
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
2:39 p.m.
>>>> "IA" == Iain Arnell
<iarnell(a)gmail.com> writes:
IA> The perl_default_filter macro changed with perl 5.14. We're now
IA> using rpm's native __requires_exclude macro (and friends) instead of
IA> the slightly hacky filter_setup stuff.
Really? Is there documentation for how this is supposed to work now?
There's an open draft on this, but I was struggling to find enough macro
magic to support the old Perl macros with the new filtering system (and
failing).
If this is taken care of, I'd really like to proceed with updating the
filtering instructions to include mention of the new hotness.
- J<
10:13 p.m.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>> "IA" == Iain Arnell
<iarnell(a)gmail.com> writes:
IA> The perl_default_filter macro changed with perl 5.14. We're now
IA> using rpm's native __requires_exclude macro (and friends) instead of
IA> the slightly hacky filter_setup stuff.
Really? Is there documentation for how this is supposed to work now?
There's an open draft on this, but I was struggling to find enough macro
magic to support the old Perl macros with the new filtering system (and
failing).
If this is taken care of, I'd really like to proceed with updating the
filtering instructions to include mention of the new hotness.
The only documentation I'm aware of is the same draft you're working
on. I'll take a look later this morning and see if I can help fill in
some of the gaps for you based on what we've learnt.
--
Iain.
10:46 p.m.
>>>> "IA" == Iain Arnell
<iarnell(a)gmail.com> writes:
IA> The only documentation I'm aware of is the same draft you're working
IA> on.
Ah, OK. For some reason I interpreted what I read to say that the Perl
filtering macros had been rewritten to make use of the new filtering
system. I'm still hoping that's possible, but differences in regexp
language and the vagaries of rpm macro expansion would seem to make it
rather difficult.
- J<
11:13 p.m.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>> "IA" == Iain Arnell
<iarnell(a)gmail.com> writes:
IA> The only documentation I'm aware of is the same draft you're working
IA> on.
Ah, OK. For some reason I interpreted what I read to say that the Perl
filtering macros had been rewritten to make use of the new filtering
system. I'm still hoping that's possible, but differences in regexp
language and the vagaries of rpm macro expansion would seem to make it
rather difficult.
Yes, perl_default_filter macro has been rewritten to use rpm's new
features. And as part of the perl 5.14 rebuild, all of the perl-* spec
files that extend the default filtering have been updated to use the
new macros directly, while preserving the old-style macros for f14/f15
(in the same way I suggest for vym). It was considerably simpler to
update the ~70 or so affected packages than try to make the old filter
macros work with new exclude stuff. It's a little messy, but hopefully
we'll be able to clean up this time next year.
--
Iain.
4633
days inactive
4634
days old
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Iain Arnell -
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Jon Ciesla