Re: introducing new macros across the whole OBS?

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:11 AM, jan matejek <jmatejek(a)suse.com&gt; wrote: > On 10.11.2016 14:02, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> Why not pull in the dependency generator I upstreamed into RPM[1] into >> openSUSE? Fedora is using it now in Fedora 25 and Rawhide[2][3], and >> Mageia is using an earlier variant of it now. It establishes common >> names for Python packages that provide egg-info or dist-info data >> (egg/wheel metadata installed on the system) that can be used for >> standardizing how Python dependencies are referenced. > > this is certainly very useful and we're looking into it, but it doesn't > seem to solve my question? > > to restate, I need to configure BuildRequires (not install-time > requirements) and pull in, as automagically as possible, all rpm > packages of "python module foo" for all supported pythons (that is > python2 and python3 at the moment, pypy3 in the near future (hopefully)) > Having the standardized names means you can just read requirements.txt or whatever and generate the list and expect it to work. It's a step that'd be required for that. OBS would likely need to grow the ability to run something like pyp2rpm spec generator before starting the build, which means being able to read requirements.txt or setup.py for the deps and resolving them properly. > also, BuildRequires are evaluated by OBS before rpmbuild starts, so I > can't rely on the usual ways of injecting macros into the build environment. > > (i'd also be interested in what Fedora has to say about the single-spec > thing, [1]. ISTM you don't do anything similar at the moment? > but i suppose that's for a different thread altogether) > > [1] https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-packaging/2016-10/msg00031.html > As far as I know, openSUSE was the *only* distribution *not* doing single spec Python 2/3 packaging. Fedora[1] and Mageia[2] both do. [1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file [2]: https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Python_policy#Samples