On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote: > I see some new build failures in rawhide related to systemd RPM macros: > Processing files: opencryptoki-3.18.0-4.fc38.s390x > error: File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf > error: File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service > […] > RPM build errors: > File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf > File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service > Child return code was: 1 > EXCEPTION: [Error()] > Is this a package problem (missing dependency on > systemd-rpm-macros), or > is this something that should be fixed at the buildroot level? Guidelines say yes, you do need a BR on that: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#packaging

> On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Tom Hughes via devel <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: > >> On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I see some new build failures in rawhide related to systemd RPM macros: >> >> Processing files: opencryptoki-3.18.0-4.fc38.s390x >> error: File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf >> error: File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service >> […] >> RPM build errors: >> File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf >> File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service >> Child return code was: 1 >> EXCEPTION: [Error()] >> >> Is this a package problem (missing dependency on systemd-rpm-macros), or >> is this something that should be fixed at the buildroot level? > > Guidelines say yes, you do need a BR on that: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#packaging I think there was some change “recently” where it needed to start being explicit rather than being brought in by some other dependency (possibly a change to systemd?). I hit the same thing in a package in Amazon Linux the other day, read the packaging guide and wondered how the package had ever built.

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith, Stewart via devel > <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: >> >> >>> On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Tom Hughes via devel <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote: >>>> I see some new build failures in rawhide related to systemd RPM macros: >>>> >>>> Processing files: opencryptoki-3.18.0-4.fc38.s390x >>>> error: File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf >>>> error: File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service >>>> […] >>>> RPM build errors: >>>> File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf >>>> File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service >>>> Child return code was: 1 >>>> EXCEPTION: [Error()] >>>> >>>> Is this a package problem (missing dependency on systemd-rpm-macros), or >>>> is this something that should be fixed at the buildroot level? >>> >>> Guidelines say yes, you do need a BR on that: >>> >>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#packaging >> >> I think there was some change “recently” where it needed to start being explicit rather than being brought in by some other dependency (possibly a change to systemd?). I hit the same thing in a package in Amazon Linux the other day, read the packaging guide and wondered how the package had ever built. > > It happened because Zbigniew changed the rich dependency from Requires > to Requires(meta): > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/c/c971c5b980dff46fb9d7885f9e26... > > I don't think Requires(meta) works when weak dependencies are turned off. Hmm, but that would be a bug in rpm (or whatever figures out the dependencies in this case). There is no documentation for the feature, except for the release notes for rpm 4.16.0: Add support for meta dependencies (eg Requires(meta): somepkg) that do not affect install/erase ordering (RhBug:1648721) The addition of "(meta)" should only affect ordering, and not the "strength" of the dependency.

Zbyszek

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:01 AM Panu Matilainen <pmatilai(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On 9/16/22 15:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith, Stewart via devel > >> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Tom Hughes via devel <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote: > >>>>> I see some new build failures in rawhide related to systemd RPM macros: > >>>>> > >>>>> Processing files: opencryptoki-3.18.0-4.fc38.s390x > >>>>> error: File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf > >>>>> error: File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service > >>>>> […] > >>>>> RPM build errors: > >>>>> File must begin with "/": %{_tmpfilesdir}/opencryptoki.conf > >>>>> File must begin with "/": %{_unitdir}/pkcsslotd.service > >>>>> Child return code was: 1 > >>>>> EXCEPTION: [Error()] > >>>>> > >>>>> Is this a package problem (missing dependency on systemd-rpm-macros), or > >>>>> is this something that should be fixed at the buildroot level? > >>>> > >>>> Guidelines say yes, you do need a BR on that: > >>>> > >>>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#packaging > >>> > >>> I think there was some change “recently” where it needed to start being explicit rather than being brought in by some other dependency (possibly a change to systemd?). I hit the same thing in a package in Amazon Linux the other day, read the packaging guide and wondered how the package had ever built. > >> > >> It happened because Zbigniew changed the rich dependency from Requires > >> to Requires(meta): > >> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/c/c971c5b980dff46fb9d7885f9e26... > >> > >> I don't think Requires(meta) works when weak dependencies are turned off. > > > > Hmm, but that would be a bug in rpm (or whatever figures out the > > dependencies in this case). There is no documentation for the > > feature, except for the release notes for rpm 4.16.0: > > > > Add support for meta dependencies (eg Requires(meta): somepkg) that > > do not affect install/erase ordering (RhBug:1648721) > > > > The addition of "(meta)" should only affect ordering, and not the "strength" > > of the dependency. > > Yes, meta is NOT a weak dependency at all, if something is treating it > as such then it's certainly a bug. > I know it's not, and at least DNF doesn't seem to have that problem on my F37 system here... If something has the problem, it'd be libsolv, but I can't reproduce it locally.

* Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the dependency > manually everywhere. The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual dependency is required, though.

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:35:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the dependency > > manually everywhere. > > The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual dependency is > required, though. Yeah, you need *some* dependency. But opencryptoki has BR:systemd-devel, and systemd-devel has R:systemd, which has the Requires(meta) under discussion. So an explicit BR:systemd-rpm-macros should be redundant.

On Mon, 2022-09-19 at 09:08 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:42:42 +0000 > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl&gt; wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:35:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > > > > > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the > > > > dependency > > > > manually everywhere. > > > > > > The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual dependency > > > is > > > required, though. > > > > Yeah, you need *some* dependency. But opencryptoki has > > BR:systemd-devel, and systemd-devel has R:systemd, which has the > > Requires(meta) under discussion. So an explicit BR:systemd-rpm- > > macros > > should be redundant. > > the BR: systemd-devel in opencryptoki might be just a historical > relict, because it used to be required to define the various macros > (IIRC) > > >                 Dan Today clamav fails to build on rawhide again, this time because make install on mock doesn't install systemd files  !

> _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

On Fri, 2022-09-23 at 22:49 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Fri, 2022-09-23 at 22:39 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-09-19 at 09:08 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > > > On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:42:42 +0000 > > > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:35:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > > > > > > > > > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the > > > > > > dependency > > > > > > manually everywhere. > > > > > > > > > > The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual > > > > > dependency > > > > > is > > > > > required, though. > > > > > > > > Yeah, you need *some* dependency. But opencryptoki has > > > > BR:systemd-devel, and systemd-devel has R:systemd, which has > > > > the > > > > Requires(meta) under discussion. So an explicit BR:systemd-rpm- > > > > macros > > > > should be redundant. > > > > > > the BR: systemd-devel in opencryptoki might be just a historical > > > relict, because it used to be required to define the various > > > macros > > > (IIRC) > > > > > > > > >                 Dan > > > > > > Today clamav fails to build on rawhide again, this time because > > make > > install on mock doesn't install systemd files  ! > > > scratch build > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=92286295 systemd-devel no longer has systemd dependency on F37+, now we also need BuildRequires: systemd

On Thu, 2022-09-29 at 08:26 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 12:01:13AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-09-23 at 22:49 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > On Fri, 2022-09-23 at 22:39 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2022-09-19 at 09:08 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:42:42 +0000 > > > > > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:35:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > dependency > > > > > > > > manually everywhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual > > > > > > > dependency > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > required, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, you need *some* dependency. But opencryptoki has > > > > > > BR:systemd-devel, and systemd-devel has R:systemd, which > > > > > > has > > > > > > the > > > > > > Requires(meta) under discussion. So an explicit BR:systemd- > > > > > > rpm- > > > > > > macros > > > > > > should be redundant. > > > > > > > > > > the BR: systemd-devel in opencryptoki might be just a > > > > > historical > > > > > relict, because it used to be required to define the various > > > > > macros > > > > > (IIRC) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >                 Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > Today clamav fails to build on rawhide again, this time because > > > > make > > > > install on mock doesn't install systemd files  ! > > > > > > > > > scratch build > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=92286295 > > > > > > systemd-devel no longer has systemd dependency on F37+, now we also > > need BuildRequires: systemd > > I don't expect clamav needs systemd to build. It probably needs > systemd-devel and systemd-rpm-macros. > > It is true that systemd-devel used to pull in systemd. It was > something > of an accident: systemd-devel had an artificial dependency on > systemd-pam, > which in turn had a dependency on systemd. The artificial dep was > added > to make system-pam a multiarch package. At some point this was solved > properly > and and hack was dropped. I don't think we want systemd-devel to > R:systemd. > systemd-devel is about various headers and libraries, and the systemd > runtime is a separate thing. > > I now pushed a commit to add in systemd-devel: > >   Requires(meta): (%{name}-rpm-macros = %{version}-%{release} if rpm- > build) > > This means we'll get systemd-rpm-macros in rpm buildroot if systemd- > devel > is installed. We had the same line on systemd itself. This way one > doesn't > need to explicitly BR:systemd-rpm-macros is either BR:systemd or > BR:systemd-devel > is specified. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clamav/c/35d73944ae2fa9cee3df4729c53a6... "Add missing dependency on systemd as it's the systemd package itself that ships systemd.pc, not systemd-devel." because clamav runs `pkg-config --variable=systemdsystemunitdir systemd` which needs /usr/share/pkgconfig/systemd.pc

and /usr/share/pkgconfig/systemd.pc is systemd (core) sub-package , maybe I would suggest move /usr/share/pkgconfig/systemd.pc and /usr/share/pkgconfig/udev.pc to devel sub-package