On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 03:32:23PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 13:26 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 12:33 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > Sure it would be nice if there was a meson extension that dealt > > > > with SELinux, but we need to implement something that works with > > > > the meson releases that exist today. If meson gains selinux > > > > support in future may be we can consider it then. > > > > > > We still need make for syntax-check though, so rewriting the SELinux > > > bits to Meson doesn't allow us to drop the dependency. And, > > > considering how complex and widely used the syntax-check logic is, I > > > don't see that being reimplemented anytime soon. > > > > That's only part of the test suite, and we don't even include > > syntax-check if not running from git, because it is only targetted > > at upstream maintainers. So that's quite different from including > > use of make in the primary build process. That is just not ok IMHO. > > Mh, fair enough. I guess we can drop > > BuildRequires: make > > from our .spec files then... I'll post a patch right away. Our RPMs build with a .git present, so they'll run syntax-checks even downstream. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
