Bug 1807915 - redhat-rpm-config: Implement %_glibc_nss_dependencies macro
Summary: redhat-rpm-config: Implement %_glibc_nss_dependencies macro
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: redhat-rpm-config
Version: 33
Hardware: All
OS: All
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Florian Festi
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1807821
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-02-27 13:13 UTC by Florian Weimer
Modified: 2020-08-26 18:49 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-08-11 13:30:09 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
macros-glibc.patch (1.86 KB, patch)
2020-02-27 13:13 UTC, Florian Weimer
no flags Details | Diff

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.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.