qulogic reported a new issue against the project: `go-rpm-macros` that you are
following:
``
While `gocheckflags` exists, it gets passed to `go-rpm-integration`, but
ignored after that. For example, if I add:
```
%global gocheckflags -timeout 30m
```
then it appears when `go-rpm-integration` is
qulogic added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I've pushed a new `golist` and rebuilt all of the packages here except
`golang-github-klauspost-crc32`, because that one doesn't seem to parse
properly.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/
The status of the issue: `Go does not install SFiles not required by the arch`
of project: `go-rpm-macros` has been updated to: Closed by qulogic.
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/17
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
To uns
qulogic merged a pull-request against the project: `golist` that you are
following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Always install SFiles whatever the arch
``
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
qulogic commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the
arch` that you are following:
``
LGTM.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
___
golang mailing list -- golang@l
eclipseo commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the
arch` that you are following:
``
Used:
```
Value: &cli.StringSlice{".proto", ".md", ".s"},
```
We're still using the v1 of urfave/cli. v2 never caught up and the whole
project seems abandoned si
nim commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the arch`
that you are following:
``
Ok, weird that @jchaloup gone to all this pain for something that does not work
Reading the urfave/cli documentation (that I don’t know well, I used
jawher/mow.cli in modist), it seems you ne
eclipseo commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the
arch` that you are following:
``
It seems the "other files" are not included by default but need to be specified
with --include-extension.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/
eclipseo commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the
arch` that you are following:
``
Tested and it doesn't work.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
___
golang m
eclipseo commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the
arch` that you are following:
``
> I assume you checked it builds and works
I haven't. But I assume it would work.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
_
nim commented on the pull-request: `Always install SFiles whatever the arch`
that you are following:
``
That looks good to me (I assume you checked it builds and works). That's how I
would have done it.
@qulogic up to you now
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https:
eclipseo added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/17
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedora
eclipseo opened a new pull-request against the project: `golist` that you are
following:
``
Always install SFiles whatever the arch
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/golist/pull-request/25
___
golang mailin
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@qulogic reading `golist` code, it should just need the same kind of processing
as for protobuf files
https://pagure.io/golist/blob/master/f/pkg/util/util.go#_77
(assuming we want all .s files added inconditionally)
``
To reply, visit th
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
That’s not hard to do (just add the flag to %goinstallflags ) but this variable
is almost empty now, because all past file selection mistakes where fixed in
`golist`
@qulogic do you need the workaround added to `go-rpm-macros` or can yo
- Original Message -
> From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:20:40 PM
> Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
>
> On Wed, Jun 1
jcajka added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I second @eclipseo. Autopatch would add complexities in complex
situations(would made using goprep impossible). Notably I have on my mind
architecture specific patches, which are not possible with autopatch.
``
To reply, visit the lin
eclipseo reported a new issue against the project: `go-rpm-macros` that you are
following:
``
Remember we said we want noarch packages? So we include *all* files whatever
the arch with IgnoredGoFiles.
SFiles are similar as they can be specific to an arch, but we don't have a
"IgnoredSFiles" opt
eclipseo added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I don't think it's needed really, it would complexify %goprep. We can use
%autopatch after %goprep to the same effect.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/3
- Original Message -
> From: "Nicolas Mailhot"
> To: "Jakub Cajka"
> Cc: golang@lists.fedoraproject.org, "Development discussions related to
> Fedora"
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:23:34 AM
> Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
>
> Le 2019-
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Closing, since the root cause is actually the same as issue #2
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/4
___
golang mailing list -- go
The status of the issue: `Issues building golang source package on EL7` of
project: `go-rpm-macros` has been updated to: Closed by nim.
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/4
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe sen
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Closing, since the root cause is actually the same as issue #2
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/4
___
golang mailing list -- go
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
And the fix is now in rawhide, with go-rpm-macros 3.0.8
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/7
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lis
The status of the issue: `%goinstall should verify explicit paths exist` of
project: `go-rpm-macros` has been updated to: Closed by nim.
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/7
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe se
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
This should be fixed with golist 0.10.0
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/1
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject
The status of the issue: `-devel subpackage is build tag specific` of project:
`go-rpm-macros` has been updated to: Closed by nim.
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/1
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
A POC implementation is here
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/macros-ng/builds/
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/2
__
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
A POC implementation is here
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/macros-ng/builds/
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/2
__
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Modules are now disabled by default, module mode will require a new tooling
stack refresh anyway. Closing
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/6
_
The status of the issue: `golist needs to be run outside the source tree to
avoid panics` of project: `go-rpm-macros` has been updated to: Closed by nim.
https://pagure.io/go-rpm-macros/issue/6
___
golang mailing list -- golang@lists.fedoraproject.org
nim added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
So, the whole Go tooling update and cleanup is now finished in rawhide.
The corresponding tooling port to EL7 is here:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/macros-ng/builds/
(lightly tested, but it should handle all the divergences
32 matches
Mail list logo