Removing deprecated %patch syntax from go-sig's packages

[Maxwell G]

Hi everyone,

RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
`N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
[1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
still use this syntax.

Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
For example, the script will change:

%patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
%patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2

If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
let me know.

---Maxwell

[1] https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html#patch-1
[2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/afd352481bacea521ce5ba...
[3] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/new_patch_syntax.s...
[4] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/go-sig/new_patch_s...

[kevin]

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 05:30:51PM +0000, Maxwell G wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
> `N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
> [1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
> warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
> rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
> still use this syntax.
>
> Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
> affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
> For example, the script will change:
>
> %patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
> %patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2
>
> If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
> let me know.

Thanks for doing this... I assume you plan to get it all done before the
mass rebuild starts? (2024-01-17)

kevin

[Miro Hrončok]

On 09. 01. 24 18:30, Maxwell G wrote:
> but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
> rpm master branch [2].

There are 2124 packages in rawhide affected by this change. Sigh.

[Maxwell G]

On Tue Jan 9, 2024 at 17:30 +0000, Maxwell G wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
> `N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
> [1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
> warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
> rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
> still use this syntax.
>
> Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
> affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
> For example, the script will change:
>
> %patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
> %patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2
>
> If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
> let me know.
>
> ---Maxwell
>
> [1] https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html#patch-1
> [2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/afd352481bacea521ce5ba...
> [3] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/new_patch_syntax.s...
> [4] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/go-sig/new_patch_s...

This has been completed. Have a good weekend!

[Richard Fearn]

rpmlint 2.4.0 (in Fedora 39) does not currently support the "%patch
-P1 -p1" syntax [1], and incorrectly reports that patches aren't
applied. 2.5.0 has a fix for this [2]. There's a 2.5.0 update for F39
currently in testing [3].

[1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/issues/461#issuecomment-1...
[2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/commit/3631d5f12bf0c26f03...
[3] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-181fd77b29

Regards,

Richard

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 at 17:31, Maxwell G  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
> `N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
> [1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
> warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
> rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
> still use this syntax.
>
> Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
> affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
> For example, the script will change:
>
> %patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
> %patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2
>
> If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
> let me know.
>
> ---Maxwell
>
> [1] https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html#patch-1
> [2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/afd352481bacea521ce5ba...
> [3] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/new_patch_syntax.s...
> [4] https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/go-sig/new_patch_s...
>
> --
> Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
> Pronouns: He/They
> --
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue