On Montag, 27. August 2018 17:17:22 CEST Tomas Chvatal wrote:

Brüns, Stefan píše v Po 27. 08. 2018 v 15:05 +0000:

...

Hi,

most packages in Factory which have been touched recently no longer carry the default %defattr(-,root,root) in the %files section.

The reasoning behind this move AFAIK is reduction of noise in the spec file. This is also somewhat enforced by the spec-cleaner, see https://github.com/ openSUSE/spec-cleaner/issues/194 There is no rpmlint check covering this.

Unfortunately, this does not match our written down policy, see: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Specfile_guidelines#Permissions --- Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) ---

It is wiki. :)

Feel free to update it to no longer mention this requirement. If you check the log it is based on very old policy that simply was not updated.

Yes, I know, just wanted some "official" confirmation before going ahead. Thanks, Stefan N�����r��y隊Z)z{.���r�+�맲��r��z�^�ˬz��N�(�֜��^� ޭ隊Z)z{.���r�+��0�����Ǩ�

On Monday, 27 August 2018 18:09 Brüns, Stefan wrote:

On Montag, 27. August 2018 17:39:16 CEST Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

... which kills building an unmodified package on an old distribution (SLES11) by the way...

Exactly. I don't say we should go to extremes to keep everything building against older distributions but deliberately breaking the build just to save one line per %file section (%defattr) or even one line per specfile (BuildRoot) doesn't make any sense to me.

Its desecration, not killing - you can not kill a dead one ;-)

SLE11 is not dead, far from it. Actually, SLE11 SP4 is still under regular maintenance, not even LTSS yet (until 2019-03-31), i.e. more alive than e.g. SLE12 up to SP2.

Its may be an issue for maintenance projects, but for most devel projects its pointless

No, it is not pointless. People do build and use latest snapshot on older systems for various reasons.

IMHO having SLE11 in e.g. science is just a waste of resources:

Quite the contrary, actually. Removing the old build targets from devel projects or even needlessly breaking build in the name of more modern specfile style results in people linking the package to their own projects so that in the end, the same package is built more times and more binaries are kept in the repositories. In other words, you end up wasting more resources this way. Michal Kubecek -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Am 28.08.2018 um 14:33 schrieb Neal Gompa:

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:32 AM Michal Kubecek wrote:

...

On Monday, 27 August 2018 18:09 Brüns, Stefan wrote:

...

On Montag, 27. August 2018 17:39:16 CEST Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

... which kills building an unmodified package on an old distribution (SLES11) by the way...

Exactly. I don't say we should go to extremes to keep everything building against older distributions but deliberately breaking the build just to save one line per %file section (%defattr) or even one line per specfile (BuildRoot) doesn't make any sense to me.

...

Its desecration, not killing - you can not kill a dead one ;-)

SLE11 is not dead, far from it. Actually, SLE11 SP4 is still under regular maintenance, not even LTSS yet (until 2019-03-31), i.e. more alive than e.g. SLE12 up to SP2.

...

Its may be an issue for maintenance projects, but for most devel projects its pointless

No, it is not pointless. People do build and use latest snapshot on older systems for various reasons.

...

IMHO having SLE11 in e.g. science is just a waste of resources:

Quite the contrary, actually. Removing the old build targets from devel projects or even needlessly breaking build in the name of more modern specfile style results in people linking the package to their own projects so that in the end, the same package is built more times and more binaries are kept in the repositories. In other words, you end up wasting more resources this way.

Then you guys at SUSE should do what we did in Fedora: add a package that backports semantics from newer versions of RPM so that spec files can follow modern guidelines without issue.

But epel-rpm-macros has nothing in it for BuildRoot: %defattr (or I was too stupid to find it...) I'll now hack the build package in my OBS instance, to just add these back if necessary when pre-processing the specfile. (I did a similar hack before to remove all "Suggests:", "Recommends:" etc, all keywords that CentOS' rpm did not understand, to allow building unchanged specfiles from openSUSE without lots of noise from "%if 0%{?rhel} ... %endif" changes)

I was incredibly happy when I was able to delete no less than two dozen lines of code from one of my spec files because we're dropping SLE 11 support. The amount of hacks and terribleness involved in supporting SLE 11 along with modern versions of SUSE Linux is quite high.

Unfortunately, SLES11 is what pays the bills or does most of the real work here ;-) -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Hi Neal, thanks for all your hints, they are really appreciated. Am 28.08.2018 um 20:08 schrieb Neal Gompa:

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:50 PM Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

Am 28.08.2018 um 14:33 schrieb Neal Gompa:

...

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:32 AM Michal Kubecek wrote:

...

On Monday, 27 August 2018 18:09 Brüns, Stefan wrote:

...

On Montag, 27. August 2018 17:39:16 CEST Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

... which kills building an unmodified package on an old distribution (SLES11) by the way...

Exactly. I don't say we should go to extremes to keep everything building against older distributions but deliberately breaking the build just to save one line per %file section (%defattr) or even one line per specfile (BuildRoot) doesn't make any sense to me.

...

Its desecration, not killing - you can not kill a dead one ;-)

SLE11 is not dead, far from it. Actually, SLE11 SP4 is still under regular maintenance, not even LTSS yet (until 2019-03-31), i.e. more alive than e.g. SLE12 up to SP2.

...

Its may be an issue for maintenance projects, but for most devel projects its pointless

No, it is not pointless. People do build and use latest snapshot on older systems for various reasons.

...

IMHO having SLE11 in e.g. science is just a waste of resources:

Quite the contrary, actually. Removing the old build targets from devel projects or even needlessly breaking build in the name of more modern specfile style results in people linking the package to their own projects so that in the end, the same package is built more times and more binaries are kept in the repositories. In other words, you end up wasting more resources this way.

Then you guys at SUSE should do what we did in Fedora: add a package that backports semantics from newer versions of RPM so that spec files can follow modern guidelines without issue.

But epel-rpm-macros has nothing in it for

BuildRoot:

Look at macros.zzz-epel in epel-rpm-macros 5-7: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/epel-rpm-macros/5/7/src/epel-rp...

OK, I only looked back to version 6, not 5 ;-), my bad. Thanks for the pointer. However, the advanced lua rpm magic (and the fact that I somehow would need to inject this via a prjconf) makes me just look at it with awe... ...and then still go on patching build.rpm on the OBS server ;-)

In the future, you can always find every build of every package that was ever released through Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/

For this package in particular, this is where I got it from: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=20323

And the sources Koji builds from is at: https://src.fedoraproject.org/

The Git sources for the package is: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/tree/el5

There's an obs-service-fedpkg source service floating around somewhere that you can use with Fedora Dist-Git to fetch and build packages in OBS using Fedora package sources. :)

Yes, Adrian also suggested I use a source service when I tried to submit my "Recommends-eliminator", but just patching build has the advantage for me that a) I don't have to deal with ugly and hard to debug source services on the OBS server b) it is one central place for me to set up and then applies to all projects, without further config

...

%defattr

RPM 4.4.2 does not require %defattr and sets a default one of "%defattr(-,root,root,-)" when it's not set in the spec file.

I think I encountered abuild-owned files on CentOS7 without %defattr a few days ago.

...

(or I was too stupid to find it...)

You're not stupid, it's just you don't know what to look for. :)

Also, part of this squarely is SUSE's fault, since their rpmlint policies are out of sync with rpm itself. The rpmlint policy for SUSE distributions was never updated to account for these changes after SLE 10 went fully EOL.

I can easily roll my own rpmlint (in fact I disarm most of the warnings that are only about "bad style", because in "my" private OBS instance, stuff in /opt is the norm, "invalid" licenses are not a problem etc. -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 10:32, Michal Kubecek wrote:

On Monday, 27 August 2018 18:09 Brüns, Stefan wrote:

...

On Montag, 27. August 2018 17:39:16 CEST Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

... which kills building an unmodified package on an old distribution (SLES11) by the way...

Exactly. I don't say we should go to extremes to keep everything building against older distributions but deliberately breaking the build just to save one line per %file section (%defattr) or even one line per specfile (BuildRoot) doesn't make any sense to me.

Yes , on SLE11 maintenance You need build latest upstream packages ..

...

Its desecration, not killing - you can not kill a dead one ;-)

SLE11 is not dead, far from it. Actually, SLE11 SP4 is still under regular maintenance, not even LTSS yet (until 2019-03-31), i.e. more alive than e.g. SLE12 up to SP2.

from development view is DEAD .. regular maintenace isnt total change of specfile..

...

Its may be an issue for maintenance projects, but for most devel projects its pointless

No, it is not pointless. People do build and use latest snapshot on older systems for various reasons.

...

IMHO having SLE11 in e.g. science is just a waste of resources:

Quite the contrary, actually. Removing the old build targets from devel projects or even needlessly breaking build in the name of more modern specfile style results in people linking the package to their own projects so that in the end, the same package is built more times and more binaries are kept in the repositories. In other words, you end up wasting more resources this way.

Michal Kubecek

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:39 AM Stefan Seyfried wrote:

Am 27.08.2018 um 17:05 schrieb Brüns, Stefan:

...

Hi,

most packages in Factory which have been touched recently no longer carry the default %defattr(-,root,root) in the %files section.

... which kills building an unmodified package on an old distribution (SLES11) by the way...

Is there any prjconf trick to re-inject this into the spec-file for less recent distributions?

The same is true for the removal of BuildRoot: directive, without it, %buildroot is no longer defined on SLES11...

In Fedora, we had a lot of tricks in the `epel-rpm-macros` package to backport functionality and behaviors from Fedora to RHEL/CentOS, and I believe we did come up with ways to do this for even EL5, which uses the same version of rpm as SLE 11. That said, let SLE 11 rest in peace and move on to SLE 15. :) -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org