rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 5:37 PM Jan Palus <atler at pld-linux.org> wrote:
>
> On 24.10.2020 17:15, Jan Rękorajski via pld-devel-en wrote:
> > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are
> > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/
> >
> > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality
> > and tell me if anything is missing / broken.
>
> First of all great work, thanks!
>
> FWIW I did a build on aarch64 with few minor fixes and looks like it
> all works fine. Some funky things that I've noticed so far:
>
> * after build with -bb --short-circuit package has weird dependency:
>
>     error: Failed dependencies:
>             rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-libs-0.42.2-3.aarch64
>             rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-0.42.2-3.aarch64
>
>   if you're not doing %prep, %build or %install then you're... cheating
>   and end up with this dep?
>
>     build/build.c:
>
>     int didBuild = (what & (RPMBUILD_PREP|RPMBUILD_BUILD|RPMBUILD_INSTALL));
>     ...
>     packageBinaries(spec, cookie, (didBuild == 0))
>
>
>     build/pack.c:
>
>     rpmRC packageBinaries(rpmSpec spec, const char *cookie, int cheating)
>     ...
>     if (cheating) {
>         (void) rpmlibNeedsFeature(pkg, "ShortCircuited", "4.9.0-1");
>     }
>

This is intentional. Short-circuit builds are not sane for production
builds, because it violates the integrity and consistency of the build
process.

> * libraries have build id symlinks, not sure what's that for:
>
>   $ rpm -ql rpm-lib
>   /lib64/librpm.so.9
>   /lib64/librpm.so.9.1.0
>   /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9
>   /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9.1.0
>   /lib64/librpmio.so.9
>   /lib64/librpmio.so.9.1.0
>   /lib64/librpmsign.so.9
>   /lib64/librpmsign.so.9.1.0
>   /usr/lib/.build-id
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/2f
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/2f/fc726b33e23f339fb4140cb2a858800f92f245
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/72
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/72/65fcdb96f521c1953560d780a5f82fa2017c2a
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/73
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/73/5b7b1130a7b6a74436438fb3fc02cad816224d
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/e6
>   /usr/lib/.build-id/e6/7a230d27a1b3fceb891aa2df1bfa5e1e980f50
>   /usr/lib64/rpm-plugins
>

That's part of the improved debuginfo package handling[1][2].

[1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo
[2]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SubpackageAndSourceDebuginfo

> * are we sticking to new patch fuzz level (0) or go back to patch
>   default (2)?

I hope you'd keep the fuzz at 0 by default.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!