I split my time between the latest Fedora and the latest CentOS these days, and it would make dogfooding packaging changes for CentOS/EPEL much easier if all the packager utilities are available. Right now, fedpkg is, but fedora-review is not.
Tracking my effort here: https://pagure.io/epel/issue/108
Apart from the usual package-not-available story (which I want to fix as part of my work bringing up the EPEL Packagers SIG), my current snag is that python-tox-current-env uses %generate_buildrequires which does not work on CentOS 8:
ERROR: Source RPM is not installable: error: Missing rpmlib features for python-tox-current-env-0.0.5- 1.el8.noarch: error: rpmlib(DynamicBuildRequires) <= 4.15.0-1
CentOS 8 is still on RPM 4.14: <mock-chroot> sh-4.4# rpm -q rpm rpm-4.14.2-37.el8.x86_64
I'll put up a patch to hardcode dependencies for non-Fedora releases, though that sorts of defeat the purpose of dynamic build requirements. Then again, this is only needed for EPEL8, since EPEL9 will have a new enough RPM.
Thanks,
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 12:32 -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
I split my time between the latest Fedora and the latest CentOS these days, and it would make dogfooding packaging changes for CentOS/EPEL much easier if all the packager utilities are available. Right now, fedpkg is, but fedora-review is not.
Tracking my effort here: https://pagure.io/epel/issue/108
Apart from the usual package-not-available story (which I want to fix as part of my work bringing up the EPEL Packagers SIG), my current snag is that python-tox-current-env uses %generate_buildrequires which does not work on CentOS 8:
ERROR: Source RPM is not installable: error: Missing rpmlib features for python-tox-current-env-0.0.5- 1.el8.noarch: error: rpmlib(DynamicBuildRequires) <= 4.15.0-1
CentOS 8 is still on RPM 4.14: <mock-chroot> sh-4.4# rpm -q rpm rpm-4.14.2-37.el8.x86_64
I'll put up a patch to hardcode dependencies for non-Fedora releases, though that sorts of defeat the purpose of dynamic build requirements. Then again, this is only needed for EPEL8, since EPEL9 will have a new enough RPM.
Given that %generate_buildrequires is the selling point of pyproject- rpm-macros, I'm guessing a better way forward for EPEL8 would be to not require it on EPEL8 since there's no way it would work, since RH won't update RPM?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pyproject-rpm-macros
Thanks,
On 12/3/20 9:41 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 12:32 -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
I split my time between the latest Fedora and the latest CentOS these days, and it would make dogfooding packaging changes for CentOS/EPEL much easier if all the packager utilities are available. Right now, fedpkg is, but fedora-review is not.
Tracking my effort here: https://pagure.io/epel/issue/108
Apart from the usual package-not-available story (which I want to fix as part of my work bringing up the EPEL Packagers SIG), my current snag is that python-tox-current-env uses %generate_buildrequires which does not work on CentOS 8:
ERROR: Source RPM is not installable: error: Missing rpmlib features for python-tox-current-env-0.0.5- 1.el8.noarch: error: rpmlib(DynamicBuildRequires) <= 4.15.0-1
CentOS 8 is still on RPM 4.14: <mock-chroot> sh-4.4# rpm -q rpm rpm-4.14.2-37.el8.x86_64
I'll put up a patch to hardcode dependencies for non-Fedora releases, though that sorts of defeat the purpose of dynamic build requirements. Then again, this is only needed for EPEL8, since EPEL9 will have a new enough RPM.
Given that %generate_buildrequires is the selling point of pyproject- rpm-macros, I'm guessing a better way forward for EPEL8 would be to not require it on EPEL8 since there's no way it would work, since RH won't update RPM?
Yes, pyproject-rpm-macros don't support EPEL < 9.
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Michel Alexandre Salim -
Miro Hrončok