Looking for testers: RPM 4.9 alpha

Panu Matilainen pmatilai at laiskiainen.org
Mon Nov 29 19:00:04 UTC 2010

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:

> On 11/26/2010 12:20 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> It's that time of year again, although there seems to be an off-by-one bug 
>> in the calendar system causing some inconsistency in the timing wrt last 
>> year :P
>> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2009-November/042339.html
>> Anyway, before going to beta and starting the inevitable Fedora Feature 
>> process, we'd like some extra preliminary testing to catch out any major 
>> issues early on.
>> The alpha isn't supposed to eat your system alive or anything, but proceed 
>> with appropriate cauting, backing up the rpmdb etc, as usual.
>> The draft release notes are at http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.9.0
>> and Fedora compatible SRPM(s) can be found at 
>> http://laiskiainen.org/rpm/srpms/
>> In particular, I'm interested in feedback on the new, pluggable and 
>> enhanced dependency extration system. Documentation is scarce at the 
>> moment but some background and examples can be found here: 
>> http://laiskiainen.org/blog/?p=35
>> Note that the current SRPM is missing gstreamer plugin, cups driver 
>> and automatic "devel-symlink" dependency generation, on purpose: the 
>> highly application-domain specific gstreamer + cups bits can now be fully 
>> moved out of rpm to gstreamer-devel etc, eliminating the need for 
>> embedding python inside /bin/sh scripts and such to avoid extra 
>> dependencies. The devel-symlink generation will stay in rpm but will 
>> probably change somewhat, it can be handled in a more generic fashion now.
>> Please report any oddities found, preferably to rpm.org Trac
>> at http://rpm.org/newticket or rpm-maint list (or here for fedora-specific 
>> discussions/suggestions etc).
>> P.S. Pjones, before you ask ;) The much wanted ordering-only feature is 
>> not in the alpha, but is likely to make it into beta. The patch itself is 
>> fairly trivial and non-intrusive, we're just trying to figure sane spec 
>> syntax for it (discussion ongoing on rpm-maint)
>>  	- Panu -
> Hello,
> I tried rebuild RPM on F-14. New RPM doesn't find all provides as it should.
> Example:
> RPM 4.9.alpha
> rpm -qp --provides perl-CGI-3.50-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
> perl-CGI = 3.50-1.fc14
> RPM from koji:
> rpm -qp --provides perl-CGI-3.50-1.fc15.noarch.rpm
> perl(CGI) 
> perl(CGI::Apache) = 1.01
> perl(CGI::Carp) = 3.45
> perl(CGI::Cookie) 
> perl(CGI::Fast) 
> perl(CGI::Pretty) = 3.46
> perl(CGI::Push) 
> perl(CGI::Switch) = 1.01
> perl(CGITempFile) 
> perl(CGI::Util) = 3.48
> perl(Fh) 
> perl(MultipartBuffer) 
> perl(utf8) 
> perl-CGI = 3.50-1.fc15
> I suppose RPM was looking for all strings 'package' in source code. Could
> you look at it? As test SRPM you can use:
> http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-CGI-3.50-1.fc14.src.rpm

Yeah, that seems fairly broken. I'll have a look, thanks for testing and 
reporting - this is just the kind of stuff I want to find out /before/ 
this hits rawhide :)

 	- Panu -

More information about the devel mailing list