On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:05 AM Michael Schroeder wrote:

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:58:15AM +0200, Mikhail Kasimov wrote:

...

After having couple of tests on [0] https://build.opensuse.org, let me introduce a way (workable patch) how to have normal %license <-> %doc RPM-macros backward compability for wide row of various versions of different RPM-based distros (RedHat/CentOS/Fedora/SUSE/openSUSE/Mageia/Mandriva). [...]

Can't you do something simple like (untested):

%{?!_licensedir:%define license %%doc}

This works for everyone but SLE 12 and SLE 12.1 (and corresponding Leap derivative releases). The reason it doesn't work is because %_licensedir is defined and filesystem didn't own the directory. So the %license macro would work, but OBS would reject the package anyway. That was fixed in SLE 12.2. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Hello, Am Donnerstag, 29. November 2018, 15:31:58 CET schrieb Mikhail Kasimov:

чт, 29 нояб. 2018 г. в 14:08, Neal Gompa :

...

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 Michael Schroeder wrote:

...

Can't you do something simple like (untested):

%{?!_licensedir:%define license %%doc}

This works for everyone but SLE 12 and SLE 12.1 (and corresponding Leap derivative releases).

The reason it doesn't work is because %_licensedir is defined and filesystem didn't own the directory. So the %license macro would work, but OBS would reject the package anyway. That was fixed in SLE 12.2. ... fprobe-1.1-23.1.i586.rpm: directories not owned by a package: - /usr/share/licenses).

The same is to the second package. Me surprised... Ideas?

You could add %dir /usr/share/licenses to %files. Even if you add version checks for the (IIRC) two distributions where this directory isn't owned by aaa_base, the spec will still look much cleaner than the big chain of version checks in your initial proposal ;-)

"Can't you do something simple like (untested): %{?!_licensedir:%define license %%doc}" <-- I'm very сareful on "simplifications" instead of giving explicit constructions. In what exact location of spec file such construction should be put?

AFAIK at or near the beginning, so that %license is defined when it gets used ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- höflich Erklärung auf einem Niveau, das nicht vorsätzlich das Gegenüber als Volltrottel hinstellt. [Lars Marowsky-Brée] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Hello! The problem for SLE_12_SP3_Backport (i586), in fact, looks more specific, with "underwater stone": https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1118751 . In particular https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1118751#c7 've left patch code "long", as it was in initial variant, to avoid potential "underwater stones" like mentioned above. Thanks! чт, 29 нояб. 2018 г. в 19:56, Christian Boltz :

Hello,

Am Donnerstag, 29. November 2018, 15:31:58 CET schrieb Mikhail Kasimov:

...

чт, 29 нояб. 2018 г. в 14:08, Neal Gompa :

...

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 Michael Schroeder wrote:

...

Can't you do something simple like (untested):

%{?!_licensedir:%define license %%doc}

This works for everyone but SLE 12 and SLE 12.1 (and corresponding Leap derivative releases).

The reason it doesn't work is because %_licensedir is defined and filesystem didn't own the directory. So the %license macro would work, but OBS would reject the package anyway. That was fixed in SLE 12.2. ... fprobe-1.1-23.1.i586.rpm: directories not owned by a package: - /usr/share/licenses).

The same is to the second package. Me surprised... Ideas?

You could add %dir /usr/share/licenses to %files. Even if you add version checks for the (IIRC) two distributions where this directory isn't owned by aaa_base, the spec will still look much cleaner than the big chain of version checks in your initial proposal ;-)

...

"Can't you do something simple like (untested): %{?!_licensedir:%define license %%doc}" <-- I'm very сareful on "simplifications" instead of giving explicit constructions. In what exact location of spec file such construction should be put?

AFAIK at or near the beginning, so that %license is defined when it gets used ;-)

Regards,

Christian Boltz -- höflich Erklärung auf einem Niveau, das nicht vorsätzlich das Gegenüber als Volltrottel hinstellt. [Lars Marowsky-Brée]

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

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