[Rpm-maint] [rpm] #866: %include macros.foo
Vít Ondruch
vondruch at redhat.com
Tue Feb 4 15:53:48 UTC 2014
Dne 4.2.2014 16:42, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Dne 28.1.2014 08:12, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>
>> #866: %include macros.foo
>> ----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Reporter: vo.x | Owner: RpmTickets
>> Type: defect | Status: closed
>> Priority: major | Milestone:
>> Component: rpm | Version: RPM Development
>> Resolution: invalid | Keywords:
>> ----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Changes (by pmatilai):
>>
>> * status: new => closed
>> * resolution: => invalid
>>
>> Comment:
>>
>> Replying to [ticket:866 vo.x]:
>> > If the package provides macros.foo rpm macros, it would be cool if I
>> could include these macros into the .spec file for internal use. For
>> example, in macros.ruby, we have defined constants, which are needed for
>> configuration of Ruby package itself and later, they are shipped in
>> ruby-
>> devel for build of other packages, which depends on Ruby.
>> >
>> > The regular %include macro can be used just inside of other blocks,
>> such
>> as %prep, %build, etc,
>>
>> Um, no. %include works anywhere in a spec.
>>
>> so I have come up with following snippet:
>> >
>> > {{{
>> > Source4: macros.ruby
>> >
>> > %{lua:
>> >
>> > for line in io.lines(rpm.expand("%{SOURCE4}")) do
>> > if line:sub(1, 1) == "%" then
>> > rpm.define(line:sub(2, -1))
>> > end
>> > end
>> >
>> > }
>> > }}}
>> >
>> > The issue with this is that the %{SOURCE4} have to be declared prior
>> this snippet, while I would like to include the macros on the top of the
>> .spec file in company of other global definitions.
>> >
>> > Is there some better solution? Could RPM provide some functionality
>> along these lines?
>>
>> Its possible to pass arguments to macros, see
>> http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Macros
>>
>> I dont see any bugs here... questions are better asked on the mailing
>> lists.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> This was originally reported as [1]. I'll just continue here, since this
> issue might get more attention.
>
>
> Ok, so %include works everywhere, but it expects spec file syntax then,
> which differs from macro file syntax.
>
> This [2] is the original source of the script in the original issue [1]
> and the macro file [3] I'd like to "include", which is later installed
> into %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/macros.ruby. But I cannot use plain %include,
> since all the macros defined in macros.ruby would need to be preceded by
> %global.
>
> This is what I tried to follow your suggestion:
>
>
>
> $ git diff
> diff --git a/ruby.spec b/ruby.spec
> index 5436e1f..280d5b6 100644
> --- a/ruby.spec
> +++ b/ruby.spec
> @@ -110,11 +110,13 @@ function source_macros(file)
> end
> end
>
> -source_macros(rpm.expand("%{SOURCE4}"))
> +--source_macros(rpm.expand("%{SOURCE4}"))
> source_macros(rpm.expand("%{SOURCE5}"))
>
> }
>
> +%expand %include %{SOURCE4}
Actually the %expand was my second try, the result is the same without
expand ....
Vít
> +
> # http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7807
> Patch0:
> ruby-2.1.0-Prevent-duplicated-paths-when-empty-version-string-i.patch
> # Allows to override libruby.so placement. Hopefully we will be able to
> return
>
>
>
> and it fails with:
>
>
>
> error: line 1: Unknown tag: %ruby_libdir /usr/share/ruby
> error: query of specfile
> /home/vondruch/fedora-scm/maintain/ruby/ruby.spec failed, can't parse
>
> Could not execute srpm: need more than 0 values to unpack
>
>
>
> In other words, I'd be glad if you can suggest how to replace the LUA
> script by something like %include, which will work or accept my LUA
> script upstream.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1] http://http://rpm.org/ticket/866
> [2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/tree/ruby.spec
> [3] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/tree/macros.ruby
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-maint mailing list
> Rpm-maint at lists.rpm.org
> http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
More information about the Rpm-maint
mailing list