RPM's support for fsverity seems to be based around the idea that fsverity
builtin signatures are being used. (RPM calls them simply "fsverity
signatures", which is a bit misleading as it's not the only way to have
signatures for fsverity files.) The builtin signatures have some problems and
Right. This is very similar to the LTO case
(7faf8eda1358f8a877b9b3d6e1197b814e80b50b), with probably a similar solution.
The simple and sane solution is to have _smp_mflags expand to
`-j${RPM_BUILD_NCPUS}`
Which ... we already did for slightly different reasons, but apparently I
completely f
`%global` itself expands to empty, not the defined value. Eg.
```
[pmatilai🎩︎localhost ~]$ rpm --eval "%global major 22"
[pmatilai🎩︎localhost ~]$ rpm --eval "%global major 22" --eval "%{major}"
22
```
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-manag
My sentiments exactly...
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2341#issuecomment-1376944404
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint
Merged #2341 into rpm-4.18.x.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2341#event-8189707070
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint m
Just noting that this will need a mention in the release notes when the time
comes: the setup.py build is not compatible with Python >= 3.12
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2341#issuecomment-1376991436
You are receiving th
Closed #1779.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1779#event-8190518803
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-
Our new year's resolution is to not let PR linger for years. So we are closing
all the old ones. This does not mean this PR is rejected. Please feel free to
reopen if there are any news.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/17
Closed #1826.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1826#event-8190522882
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-
Our new year's resolution is to not let PR linger for years. So we are closing
all the old ones. This does not mean this PR is rejected. Please feel free to
reopen if there are any news.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/18
Our new year's resolution is to not let PR linger for years. So we are closing
all the old ones. This does not mean this PR is rejected. Please feel free to
reopen if there are any news.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/18
Closed #1828.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1828#event-8190525193
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-
Merged #2326 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2326#event-8190550640
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint maili
This looks like it is leaking memory in `fn`. Why not just add the `'` in the
`rpmExpand` call.
This change also could use a test case
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2338#issuecomment-1377065964
You are receiving this be
Please rebase onto current master.
The commit message needs an explanation on why the name change is needed and
why the new name is more correct than the old one.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2336#issuecomment-13770746
#2210
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2326#issuecomment-1377079961
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-m
Merging the different variant into one package should be easy. But I am still
looking for a way to get the human readable name for that.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2300#issuecomment-1377274088
You are receiving this b
I tried
```diff
===
--- rpm-4.18.0.orig/platform.in
+++ rpm-4.18.0/platform.in
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
if [ -n "$ncpus_max" ] && [ "$ncpus_max" -gt 0 ] && [
"$RPM_BUILD_NCPUS" -gt "$ncpus_max" ]; then RPM_BUILD_NCPUS="$ncpus_max";
@wangp-h pushed 1 commit.
fc50800209a2f6feb92692236d517649fb75ad20 fix leaking memory
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2338/files/d133dd5f64812841a2acc1c0b0629076e73d359e..fc50800209a2f6feb92692236d517649fb75ad20
You are receiving this because you are su
Closed #2338.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2338#event-8197250942
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-
> This looks like it is leaking memory in `fn`. Why not just add the `'` in the
> `rpmExpand` call.
>
> This change also could use a test case Edit: Sorry, just seen that it is in a
> separate PR.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-managemen
Reopened #2338.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2338#event-8197252022
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rp
> Please rebase onto current master.
>
> The commit message needs an explanation on why the name change is needed and
> why the new name is more correct than the old one.
loongarch is the architecture name, loongarch64 is only used to distinguish
between 64-bit and 32-bit infrastructure
--
Re
This cherry-picks 3 commits from master
to not embed the build machine CPU core count into .src.rpms
Fixes #2343
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2344
-- Commit Summary --
* Calculate number of threads to us
I checked git log and found some related commits.
#2344 now does the trick for me.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2343#issuecomment-1378203226
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID
Something is still not right here.
`/usr/lib/rpm/platform/x86_64-linux/macros` has
```
%_smp_mflags -j%{_smp_build_ncpus}
```
that still gets expanded into .src.rpm
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2344#issuecomment-137820
26 matches
Mail list logo
