Bug 1807915

Summary: redhat-rpm-config: Implement %_glibc_nss_dependencies macro
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Florian Weimer <fweimer>
Component: redhat-rpm-configAssignee: Florian Festi <ffesti>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 33CC: ajax, ffesti, fweimer, igor.raits, john.j5live, jonathan, j, mzidek, pmatilai, praiskup, sgallagh
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-08-11 13:30:09 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1807821    
Attachments:
Description Flags
macros-glibc.patch none

Description Florian Weimer 2020-02-27 13:13:33 UTC 
Created attachment 1666196 [details]
macros-glibc.patch

Relevant Fedora devel thread:

Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/3HZSIWSPEEC6KL6OBWSIPPYHU3CUL5YK/

I want to put this into a macro so that we can easily make adjustments if there are other situations similar to x86-64 vs x86-32.

I'm attaching a patch that seems to get the job done. Its use looks like this in the glibc spec file:

%package -n nss_db
Summary: Name Service Switch (NSS) module using hash-indexed files
Requires: %{name}%{_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
%{_glibc_nss_dependencies nss_db}
Comment 1 Stephen Gallagher 2020-02-27 15:26:56 UTC 
CCing Michal Zidek as the SSSD maintainer since this will apply to the sssd-nss subpackage.
Comment 2 Ben Cotton 2020-08-11 13:10:55 UTC 
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 33 development cycle.
Changing version to 33.
Comment 3 Florian Weimer 2020-08-11 13:30:09 UTC 
I assume package maintainers will write the dependencies manually into their spec files.
Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2020-08-26 18:49:49 UTC 
I have to wonder why you didn't just commit this if you think it would be useful.  As far as I can tell you are one of the maintainers of the redhat-rpm-config package.

The only comment I'd make is that if this isn't some internal thing that other macros depend upon but instead something you expect packagers to use directly, the macro name shouldn't be prefixed with an underscore.