[Rpm-maint] [rpm] #866: %include macros.foo

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 4.2.2014 18:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
> On 02/04/2014 05:42 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> 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}
>> +
>>   # 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
>>
>
> Hardly surprising if you actually think about what %expand and
> %include do - they dont magically transform one format into something
> else.

Exactly :)

>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>
> http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=commit;h=784dfb421924110e4da7da0ca2948a2cf5af36a4
>

Cool! Thanks!

Any estimate when it lands in Fedora? Will it be backported? I slightly
updated my macro which could be easier to backport:


%if %{undefined load}
%{lua:

function source_macros(file)
  local macro = nil

  for line in io.lines(file) do
    -- Ignore comment lines.
    if not macro and line:match("^%%") then
      macro = line:match("^%%(.*)$")
      line = nil
    end

    if macro then
      -- Multiline macros handling.
      if line and macro:match("^.-%s*\\%s*$") then
        macro = macro .. '\n' .. line
      end

      if not macro:match("^.-%s*\\%s*$") then
        rpm.define(macro)
        macro = nil
      end
    end
  end
end

}

%define load() %{lua:source_macros(rpm.expand("%1"))}
%endif


%load %{SOURCE4}
%load %{SOURCE5}



Vít