license of the binary policy
by Jilayne Lovejoy
Hi Fedora legal and packaging,
I'm cross-posting this, as I think it's relevant to both groups.
The current policy for filling out the license field of the spec file
(as described at
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidel...
) states, "The License: field refers to the licenses of the contents of
the binary rpm. When in doubt, ask."
As we consider how to improve documentation related to Fedora licensing,
it would be helpful to hear people's thoughts on the following:
1) how do you (package maintainers) interpret this policy in practice?
2) what further information/documentation about this policy would be
helpful?
3) should this policy be different, and if so, how?
4) any other related thoughts or observations
Thanks!
Jilayne
1 month, 3 weeks
Automatic virtual provides for RPM macros?
by Miro Hrončok
Hello,
today at Nest, somebody said "unfortunately, there is no way to tell what
package to install to get a particular RPM macro".
I think that having an RPM provides generator for "rpm-macro(__python3)" or
similar should be a fairly simple exercise.
Would you folks consider that useful?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
1 year, 2 months
Intersection of 2 arches macros
by Miro Hrončok
Hello packaging folks.
I was in need of computing an intersection of 2 arches today.
Consider this:
%java_arches: aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64
%my_arches: i686 x86_64
Plan:
ExclusiveArch: <intersection of %java_arches and %my_arches>
Is there some idiomatic way of doing this? I came up with:
ExclusiveArch: %(comm -12 <(echo %{java_arches} | tr ' ' '\n' | sort) \
<(echo %{my_arches} | tr ' ' '\n' | sort) | tr '\n' ' ')
Which I consider quite horrible.
I was considering Lua to avid shelling out to nested Shell, but Lua has no easy
sets, so the code would be much longer.
Is there some easier way? Should there be? Something like:
ExclusiveArch: %{arch_intersect %java_arches & %my_arches}
Note the & that serves as a separator, otherwise the arches would be mixed and
would need to be put in some kind of quotes. Alternatively, the macro names
could be passed instead to avoid a need of a separator
ExclusiveArch: %{arch_intersect java_arches my_arches}
(Both approaches allow to intersect arbitrary number of sets.)
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
1 year, 7 months
EPEL selinux policy
by Mukundan Ragavan
I have a packaging question -
One of the packages I maintain, nextcloud-client, fails to execute in
EPEL-9. It is being blocked by SELinux policy.
getsebool selinuxuser_execmod is off in EL9.
Is it even allowed to change SELinux rule in, for example, %post?
I suspect the correct way to do this is to file a bug, correct?
Thanks.
--
GPG Key: E5C8BC67
1 year, 8 months
