* Marguerite Su <i@marguerite.su> [2012-10-30 11:08]:

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Guido Berhoerster <gber@opensuse.org> wrote:

...

%define xulrunner_version %(rpm -q --queryformat '%%{VERSION}' xulrunner-devel)

should work. "%()" is expanded together with the macros before building so you can use the %xulrunner_version for %if blocks, two "%" escape the version macro. Needless to say that this isn't really pretty.

Hi, Guido

It didn't work...

%if %{xulrunner_version} >= 16 <== line 237 %patch -p1 %endif

error: parse error in expression error: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/gpac.spec:237: parseExpressionBoolean returns -1

seems "%define xulrunner_version %(rpm -q --queryformat '%%{VERSION}' xulrunner-devel)" returns 0 or the return is not a number but a warning string.

Numeric comparisons only work with integers, if you only need to compare the major version you can get away with: %define xulrunner_major_ver %(rpm -q --queryformat %'%%{VERSION}\\n' xulrunner-devel | sed 's|\\..*$||') [...] %if %xulrunner_major_ver >= 16 [...] %endif If you need a full rpm version string comparison you need a lua macro: %{lua: if rpm.vercmp(rpm.expand("%(rpm -q --queryformat '%%{VERSION}' xulrunner-devel)"), "16.0.0") >= 0 then rpm.define("xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 1") else rpm.define("xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 0") end } %if %xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 [...] %endif Not sure if so much black magic would pass a Factory review... -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:15:14AM +0800, Marguerite Su wrote:

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Guido Berhoerster <gber@opensuse.org> wrote:

...

Numeric comparisons only work with integers, if you only need to compare the major version you can get away with: %define xulrunner_major_ver %(rpm -q --queryformat %'%%{VERSION}\\n' xulrunner-devel | sed 's|\\..*$||') [...] %if %xulrunner_major_ver >= 16 [...] %endif

If you need a full rpm version string comparison you need a lua macro: %{lua: if rpm.vercmp(rpm.expand("%(rpm -q --queryformat '%%{VERSION}' xulrunner-devel)"), "16.0.0") >= 0 then rpm.define("xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 1") else rpm.define("xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 0") end } %if %xulrunner_ge_16_0_0 [...] %endif

Thanks! That's it!

...

Not sure if so much black magic would pass a Factory review...

Hi! Wearing my review-team-membership hat* 1.) it is perfectly valid to check package version in a spec calling rpm -q $PACKAGE - Rudi pointed it makes more sense to do that, that missusing %suse_version macro. 2.) usage of rpm in %scripplets is strictly prohibited * I know it, because I've asked on a team ML recently Regards Michal Vyskocil

* Marguerite Su <i@marguerite.su> [2012-11-01 16:17]:

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Michal Vyskocil <mvyskocil@suse.cz> wrote:

...

1.) it is perfectly valid to check package version in a spec calling rpm -q $PACKAGE - Rudi pointed it makes more sense to do that, that missusing %suse_version macro.

I still think it might be a good idea to give Tumbleweed a valid rolling version number like 1225 (1220 < Tumbleweed < Factory = 1230) in /usr/lib/rpm/suse_macros. or just add a new macro like sles.

But since it's not possible (seems), we can use specific package version to do the trick.

eg: xulrunner-devel is not available in <=1210. and Tumbleweed is the only one have 14.0.1 version. (12.2 is 16.0.1 and Factory is 16.0.2)

so:

%if 0%{?suse_version} >= 1220 %if 0%{?xulrunner_version} < 15 // Now you're in Tumbleweed env %endif %endif

the shortcoming is if Tumbleweed updates this package, we need to find new unique package. or we can submit a fake package into Tumbleweed to do the job solely.

A suse_version number only really makes sense for stable releases (that is the version number corresponds to a mostly static set of packages), for Tumbleweed and Factory they do not have much meaning.

PS: Guido, is "s|\\..*$||" regression? I asked around on gtalk, but no one knows such regex style...can you explain it a little bit?

Not sure what you mean, it's just a BRE, the double backslash is needed there because rpmbuild also interprets backslashes. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org