On 03/02/11 10:15, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 02/03/2011 09:42 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 19:59:07 -0500
>> Tom Lane<tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> For the last week or so I've been getting broken-dependencies nagmail
>>> about
>>>
>>> mysql-test-5.5.8-6.fc15.x86_64 requires perl(mtr_misc.pl)
>>>
>>> The depchecker is correct about that: the RPM built by koji shows an
>>> unresolved dependency of that form. The question is how that
>>> dependency is getting past the __perl_requires filter that mysql.spec
>>> uses, which looks like this:
>>>
>>> #!/bin/sh
>>>
>>> /usr/lib/rpm/perl.req $* | \
>>> grep -v -e "perl(th" \
>>> -e "perl(lib::mtr" -e "perl(lib::v1/mtr" -e "perl(mtr"
>>>
>>> What makes this especially weird is that the filter is working to the
>>> extent of successfully removing several other symbols, including some
>>> that match the "perl(mtr" pattern.
>>>
>>> This problem appeared after I built mysql 5.5.8-6 on 20-Jan. The
>>> dependency filter was working correctly in previous builds, the
>>> latest being 5.5.8-5 on 13-Jan. When I build the same SRPM locally
>>> on my Fedora 13 box, no unexpected requires show up in the result.
>>>
>>> It's a bit hard to credit that grep itself is broken, not least
>>> because it doesn't appear to have been rebuilt since October. There
>>> has been a fair amount of churn in rpm since 13-Jan, though. Should
>>> I file this as an rpm bug, or is there some other likely explanation?
>>
>> RPM 4.9 has made changes in the provides/requires extraction code that
>> are not entirely backwards-compatible. One of these is in respect of
>> perl dependency extraction where there is now %__perllib_requires as
>> well as %__perl_requires. So you need to filter that as well as or
>> instead of (as necessary) %__perl_requires. You'll need to be careful if
>> you want the spec to be backwards compatible with older rpm versions
>> though, where %__perllib_requires isn't defined.
>
> Defining %__perllib_requires is safe as older rpm's simply don't use it
> for anything. However for rpm 4.9.0 you can use the built-in dependency
> filtering instead of redefining the scripts:
>
> %__provides_exclude and %__requires_exclude can used to filter the
> results of generated dependencies, and %__provides_exclude_from and
> %__requires_exclude_from can be used to exclude entire files from
> dependency generation. These operate with regular expressions, eg
> to filter all requires with 'mtr' in them you'd use something like
>
> %define __requires_exclude .*mtr.*
>
> or to stop provides generation for, say, private libraries, you could
> use something like
>
> %define __provides_exclude_from ^%{_libdir}/mylib/.*\.so$
>
>> Presumably you can't use
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering
>> because this SRPM builds elf binaries.
>
> Yup... the Fedora-specific filtering macros have various unwanted
> side-effects (due to using the external dependency generator mode) and
> should be phased out now that rpm has built-in support for filtering.
The fedora-specific macros are endemic within the perl module packages
(particularly arch-specific ones, where it's desirable to filter out .so
provides for private objects) so perhaps it would be good to convert at
least %perl_default_filter to use the new filtering capability in
Rawhide (defined in macros.perl in the perl package).
Paul.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
