From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
To: <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] rpm: Enable compatibility with older RPM packages that have invalid platforms
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:51:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1376088690-24013-3-git-send-email-mark.hatle@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1376088690-24013-1-git-send-email-mark.hatle@windriver.com>
Some LSB packages appear to have the platform set to '%{_target_platform}'
which is not a valid platform field. This causes a failure of the type:
warning: package lsb-test-core-4.1.15-1.x86_64 is intended for a %{_target_platform} platform
When we detect an invalid platform, fall back and try to construct a new
platform name that may be valid based on the arch and os contents of the
package. (This should only ever be needed by invalid or older RPM packages.)
Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
---
.../rpm/rpm/rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++
meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm/rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch
diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm/rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm/rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7101e5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm/rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+Enable platform tag matching workaround in OE.
+
+When installing some LSB packages the 'platform' field in the package
+appears to be invalid. Instead of relying solely on the platform comparison
+we also want to generate a perceived platform based on the valid rpm contents
+of arch and os.
+
+Upstream-Status: Pending
+
+Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
+
+Index: rpm-5.4.9/lib/depends.c
+===================================================================
+--- rpm-5.4.9.orig/lib/depends.c
++++ rpm-5.4.9/lib/depends.c
+@@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ int rpmtsAddInstallElement(rpmts ts, Hea
+ platform = rpmExpand(arch, "-unknown-", os, NULL);
+
+ rc = rpmPlatformScore(platform, platpat, nplatpat);
+-#if defined(RPM_VENDOR_MANDRIVA)
++#if defined(RPM_VENDOR_MANDRIVA) || defined(RPM_VENDOR_OE)
+ /*
+ * If no match on platform tag, we'll try again with arch tag
+ * in case platform tag is inconsistent with it, which is the case
diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb
index 3f4854e..bd05336 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb
@@ -86,7 +86,8 @@ SRC_URI = "http://www.rpm5.org/files/rpm/rpm-5.4/rpm-5.4.9-0.20120508.src.rpm;ex
file://rpm-platform2.patch \
file://rpm-remove-sykcparse-decl.patch \
file://debugedit-segv.patch \
- file://rpm-platform-file-fix.patch \
+ file://rpm-platform-file-fix.patch \
+ file://rpm-lsb-compatibility.patch \
"
# Uncomment the following line to enable platform score debugging
--
1.8.3
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-09 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-09 22:51 [PATCH 0/2] RPM changes Mark Hatle
2013-08-09 22:51 ` [PATCH 1/2] rpm: Change references from RPM_VENDOR_POKY to RPM_VENDOR_OE Mark Hatle
2013-08-09 22:51 ` Mark Hatle [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1376088690-24013-3-git-send-email-mark.hatle@windriver.com \
--to=mark.hatle@windriver.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox