[Rpm-maint] Plugin ponderings

Panu Matilainen pmatilai at laiskiainen.org
Thu Nov 29 15:32:50 UTC 2012

On 11/29/2012 04:57 PM, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
>> Much better late than never, the indentation is now exactly as it should
> be, good! There's just one extra leftover indent level for the execv() call.
> Oh, missed that one since it wasn't in diff: fixed now!
>> I'm afraid we'll need one more round: you perhaps took my "that's what
> RPMSCRIPTLET_EXEC bit is for" (wrt embedded scripts) a bit too literally :)
>> What I meant is that the RPMSCRIPTLET_EXEC bit defines whether something is
> embedded or external - external scripts always have it, embedded ones never
> have it as there is nothing to exec. The patch gets it a bit backwards in
> rpmScriptRun():
>   Oh, then I indeed misunderstood you: I was thinking that external scripts
> will have fork + exec and lua ones just exec, since they are "executed"
> after all (just not via exec). Now fixed, too.
>> While not strictly necessary, I think rpmLuaScript() could be changed to
> take the additional 'plugins' argument while we're at it, if only to keep
> symmetry between the two functions. It'll be needed later on anyway, unlike
> the selinux argument which gets >passed to runLuaScript() just for the
> symmetry's sake.
> Sure, added!
> I am attaching the new version now *without* saying that this is "the last
> one" :)

Heh, curse of the famous last words avoidance :)
It worked too - applied & pushed now. Thank you!

	- Panu -

More information about the Rpm-maint mailing list