[Dev] Tizen RPM macros now defines %suse_version : good or not ?

Stéphane Desneux stephane.desneux at open.eurogiciel.org
Thu Aug 7 12:32:22 GMT 2014


On 07/08/2014 13:05, Chanho Park wrote:
> Hi Stephane,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dev [mailto:dev-bounces at lists.tizen.org] On Behalf Of Stephane
>> Desneux
>> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 7:09 PM
>> To: Dev at lists.tizen.org
>> Subject: [Dev] Tizen RPM macros now defines %suse_version : good or not ?
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently, Yury Usishchev added a patch over the rpm package:
>> https://review.tizen.org/gerrit/#/c/25292/
>>
>> This patch adds the %suse_version definition to rpm-tizen_macros.
>>
>> This broke the build for some packages that use %suse_version in
>> Tizen:Common and I opened a bug for that:
>> https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/TC-1474
>>
>> I see two cases:
>> - a package must be built into Tizen and into openSuse. Example: mic,
>> kickstarter, ... and maybe other tools that have a single spec file for
>> multiple distros (including tizen)
> 
> We didn't catch there is some packages to build by openSUSE.
> 
>> - a package is specific to Tizen but the spec file was initially copied
>> from openSUSE (and may contain some tests on %suse_version which should
>> be removed).
>>
>> From what Yury told me, the base reason to add %suse_version was:
>> "%suse_version macro is checked by 'build' script and enables cumulate
>> install. It is believed to be a bit faster and reduces number of errors
>> with msm.so." So it was added for good reasons. But maybe it's not the
>> proper way to fix the base problem.
>>
>>
>> So my final question is simple: is it desirable to define %suse_version
>> into Tizen ?
>>
>>
>> IMO, the answer should be *no* and we should rollback to the previous
>> state for all impacted packages (rpm, icecream, mic, kickstarter,
>> python-yaml, ...). But this also means that the special ops done by
>> 'build' when it detects the %suse_version macro should be done also when
>> %tizen_version is defined. Is it something that the Tools team can
>> investigate ?
> 
> I've made a patch to fix this problem. Instead of defining the suse_version,
> I set the DO_CUMULATIVE varables always TRUE because we'll always use newer
> suse version than 1220.
> If the patch can resolve the issue, I'll revert all of my patches.
> 
> https://review.tizen.org/gerrit/#/c/25635/

LGTM !

As soon as it's merged, please resubmit the previous group of packages
in one single group (gbs submit -T <tag>) for:
- rpm (to be fixed to remove %suse_version in macros)
- build

IIRC, the following packages should also be resubmitted in the same
group with the previously accepted commits:
- icecream
- mic
- kickstarter
- python-yaml
- zypper

I'm not sure if this list is complete, but it's not far from the
submissions you did to fix the build errors.

Thanks Chanho.

Best regards,
-- 
Stéphane Desneux
Intel OTC - Vannes/FR
gpg:1CA35726/DFA9B0232EF80493AF2891FA24E3A2841CA35726


More information about the Dev mailing list