FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-22-2008, 10:41 PM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default providing what they require

On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:28:19 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:

> 2008/10/22 seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org>:
> > Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
> >
> > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
> >
> > Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
> > time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
> > packages do something like this manually, please stop it.
> >
> >
>
> Um, how to stop it? - most of those Provides are automatically
> generated by rpm. I know there is some messy instructions on how to
> filter those for perl packages in the guidelines, but it seems more
> widespread than perl packages...

Don't misunderstand Seth's list. The Provides are necessary and must not
be stripped, because external packages may require them. The Requires
in a pkg could be stripped if it's the same pkg that Provides the
needed things.

The "thunderbird" pkg contains a "find-external-requires" script which
does the thing that's proposed here. It ought to be rpmbuild, though,
that does this for all pkgs.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-22-2008, 10:49 PM
seth vidal
 
Default providing what they require

On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 00:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:28:19 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>
> > 2008/10/22 seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org>:
> > > Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
> > >
> > > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
> > >
> > > Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
> > > time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
> > > packages do something like this manually, please stop it.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Um, how to stop it? - most of those Provides are automatically
> > generated by rpm. I know there is some messy instructions on how to
> > filter those for perl packages in the guidelines, but it seems more
> > widespread than perl packages...
>
> Don't misunderstand Seth's list. The Provides are necessary and must not
> be stripped, because external packages may require them. The Requires
> in a pkg could be stripped if it's the same pkg that Provides the
> needed things.
>
> The "thunderbird" pkg contains a "find-external-requires" script which
> does the thing that's proposed here. It ought to be rpmbuild, though,
> that does this for all pkgs.

Yes - if the pkg provides something it requires then the requires can be
removed.

A simple addition to the rpmbuild process to remove these items from the
requires wouldn't hurt.

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-22-2008, 10:49 PM
seth vidal
 
Default providing what they require

On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 16:08 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 4:03 PM, seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
> >
> > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
> >
> > Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
> > time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
> > packages do something like this manually, please stop it.
> >
> >
> > here's the script I used to generate the output:
> >
> > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-they-require.py
> >
>
> My brain no work. This means that they require themselves to
> build/install? Or something else?
>

These pkgs have a requirement against something that they, themselves
provide.

So the requirement is unnecessary.

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-22-2008, 10:53 PM
"Jonathan Underwood"
 
Default providing what they require

2008/10/22 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:28:19 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>
>> 2008/10/22 seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org>:
>> > Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
>> >
>> > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
>> >
>> > Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
>> > time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
>> > packages do something like this manually, please stop it.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Um, how to stop it? - most of those Provides are automatically
>> generated by rpm. I know there is some messy instructions on how to
>> filter those for perl packages in the guidelines, but it seems more
>> widespread than perl packages...
>
> Don't misunderstand Seth's list. The Provides are necessary and must not
> be stripped, because external packages may require them. The Requires
> in a pkg could be stripped if it's the same pkg that Provides the
> needed things.
>

Uh, yeah, I typo'd Provides - I meant Requires, of course.

> The "thunderbird" pkg contains a "find-external-requires" script which
> does the thing that's proposed here. It ought to be rpmbuild, though,
> that does this for all pkgs.

Yeah. So should we bother munging spec files for this if it's going to
be fixed in rpmbuild anyway? I guess not.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-22-2008, 11:29 PM
Sam Varshavchik
 
Default providing what they require

seth vidal writes:


On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 16:08 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 4:03 PM, seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
>
> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
>
> Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
> time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
> packages do something like this manually, please stop it.
>
>
> here's the script I used to generate the output:
>
> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-they-require.py
>

My brain no work. This means that they require themselves to
build/install? Or something else?



These pkgs have a requirement against something that they, themselves
provide.

So the requirement is unnecessary.


Ummm. This is going to be any package that installs a shared library, and
some binary that's linked against the shared library. That pretty much
includes everything.


If this needs to be fixed, in should be fixed in rpmbuild.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-22-2008, 11:43 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default providing what they require

On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 19:29 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> If this needs to be fixed, in should be fixed in rpmbuild.

That's the idea, and what Seth was suggesting.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-23-2008, 01:19 AM
Chris Adams
 
Default providing what they require

Once upon a time, seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> said:
> Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.

Okay, but what is the problem? If you want to know what requires
libfoo.so.42 and do "rpm -q --whatrequires libfoo.so.42", why shouldn't
it include "foo-42-13.fc10.i386" in the list if some binary in package
foo is linked against libfoo.so.42?

I'm not saying it isn't mostly redundant, but I don't see what the big
deal is. Is it causing a problem in yum depsolving or something?
--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-23-2008, 02:12 AM
Matthew Miller
 
Default providing what they require

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 08:19:37PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Okay, but what is the problem? If you want to know what requires
> libfoo.so.42 and do "rpm -q --whatrequires libfoo.so.42", why shouldn't
> it include "foo-42-13.fc10.i386" in the list if some binary in package
> foo is linked against libfoo.so.42?
> I'm not saying it isn't mostly redundant, but I don't see what the big
> deal is. Is it causing a problem in yum depsolving or something?

I imagine it's a speed thing.

--
Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org>
Senior Systems Architect
Cyberinfrastructure Labs
Computing & Information Technology
Harvard School of Engineering & Applied Sciences

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-23-2008, 06:44 AM
Ville Skyttä
 
Default providing what they require

On Thursday 23 October 2008, seth vidal wrote:

> Yes - if the pkg provides something it requires then the requires can be
> removed.
>
> A simple addition to the rpmbuild process to remove these items from the
> requires wouldn't hurt.

When I suggested this on rpm-maint a little over a year ago, there were some
objections because that would render rpm's --filerequire less useful/correct
than it is today. Maybe it wasn't implemented because of that or just
because of lack of manpower at the time.

http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2007-July/001578.html

The objection is valid per se, --filerequire would suffer (but not become
entirely useless). I wouldn't personally mind inflicting some inaccuracy
into it if the gains are large enough. I got a 7.3% decrease estimate in
overall number of dependencies in Fedora which should be order-of-magnitude
correct (see above post for more details).

But if this can't be done in rpm(build), it probably can in createrepo as I
don't think something like --filerequire is (or even can be) implemented in
any tools using the metadata.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-23-2008, 02:13 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default providing what they require

seth vidal (skvidal@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Here is a list of pkgs and their requirement that they also provide.
>
> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/provides-what-required-rawhide.txt
>
> Now, it would be handy if rpm filtered these out automagically at build
> time, and that's something to think about. If you notice if any of your
> packages do something like this manually, please stop it.

Stop doing manual filtering of the requires? This was needed in the
past when we had multiple apps with their own xulrunner copies, to
avoid brokenness on upgrade.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:33 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org