* [Patch] Compare two local RPMs
[not found] <718746663.1964037.1471008173635.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
@ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` Chenxiong Qi
2016-01-01 0:00 ` [PATCH] Bug 20380 - " Chenxiong Qi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Chenxiong Qi @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libabigail
Hi,
This patch[1] allows fedabipkgdiff be able to compare ABI against two local RPMs, e.g. fedabipkgdiff path/to/rpm path/to/another/rpm
Also, because of the new class RPMCollection, it's easy to fix bug 20270, that is to make fedabipkgdiff relax with development and debuginfo package. If there is no such a package, fedabipkgdiff just ignores them and continue comparing rather than raising an error. However, if user really wants to treat this as an error, the new option --error-on-warning can be used.
[1] https://cqi.fedorapeople.org/libabigail/0001-Bug-20270-Compare-two-local-RPMs.patch
Regards,
--
Chenxiong Qi (齐辰雄)
Senior Software Engineer / RHCE
Pnt DevOps - Development, Beijing
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Bug 20380 - Compare two local RPMs
2016-01-01 0:00 ` [PATCH] Bug 20380 - " Chenxiong Qi
@ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` Dodji Seketeli
2016-01-01 0:00 ` Chenxiong Qi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dodji Seketeli @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chenxiong Qi; +Cc: libabigail
Hello Chenxiong,
Chenxiong Qi <cqi@redhat.com> a écrit:
> Patch[1] is updated with the new terms. Please review.
>
> [1]
> https://cqi.fedorapeople.org/libabigail/0001-Bug-20380-Compare-two-local-RPMs.patch
The patch looks good to me, thank you very much!
I have thus applied it to the master branch of the Git repository.
I have made some nitpicking changes, mostly to rename the the
RPMCollection.devel_debuginfo_rpms data member into
RPMCollection.ancillary_rpms and to adjust some comments.
I also have one question:
When you say this:
This patch allows developer to compare two local RPMs in form
fedabipkgdiff some/place/foo.rpm another/place/bar.rpm
But, network is still needed to talk with Koji.
Why do we need to talk to Koji if the two packages and *all* their
ancillary RPMs are present?
Cheers,
--
Dodji
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Bug 20380 - Compare two local RPMs
2016-01-01 0:00 ` Dodji Seketeli
@ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` Chenxiong Qi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Chenxiong Qi @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dodji Seketeli; +Cc: libabigail
On 12/12/2016 10:39 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> Hello Chenxiong,
>
>
> Chenxiong Qi <cqi@redhat.com> a écrit:
>
>> Patch[1] is updated with the new terms. Please review.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://cqi.fedorapeople.org/libabigail/0001-Bug-20380-Compare-two-local-RPMs.patch
>
> The patch looks good to me, thank you very much!
>
> I have thus applied it to the master branch of the Git repository.
>
> I have made some nitpicking changes, mostly to rename the the
> RPMCollection.devel_debuginfo_rpms data member into
> RPMCollection.ancillary_rpms and to adjust some comments.
>
> I also have one question:
>
> When you say this:
>
> This patch allows developer to compare two local RPMs in form
>
> fedabipkgdiff some/place/foo.rpm another/place/bar.rpm
>
> But, network is still needed to talk with Koji.
>
> Why do we need to talk to Koji if the two packages and *all* their
> ancillary RPMs are present?
>
"network is still needed to talk with Koji." is incorrect. It doesn't.
Sorry for that.
> Cheers,
>
--
Regards,
Chenxiong Qi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Bug 20380 - Compare two local RPMs
2016-01-01 0:00 ` [Patch] Compare two local RPMs Chenxiong Qi
@ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` Chenxiong Qi
2016-01-01 0:00 ` Dodji Seketeli
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Chenxiong Qi @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libabigail
Hi,
Patch[1] is updated with the new terms. Please review.
[1]
https://cqi.fedorapeople.org/libabigail/0001-Bug-20380-Compare-two-local-RPMs.patch
On 08/12/2016 09:23 PM, Chenxiong Qi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch[1] allows fedabipkgdiff be able to compare ABI against two local RPMs, e.g. fedabipkgdiff path/to/rpm path/to/another/rpm
>
> Also, because of the new class RPMCollection, it's easy to fix bug 20270, that is to make fedabipkgdiff relax with development and debuginfo package. If there is no such a package, fedabipkgdiff just ignores them and continue comparing rather than raising an error. However, if user really wants to treat this as an error, the new option --error-on-warning can be used.
>
> [1] https://cqi.fedorapeople.org/libabigail/0001-Bug-20270-Compare-two-local-RPMs.patch
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Chenxiong Qi (é½è¾°é›„)
> Senior Software Engineer / RHCE
> Pnt DevOps - Development, Beijing
>
--
Regards,
Chenxiong Qi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-12-13 5:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <718746663.1964037.1471008173635.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
2016-01-01 0:00 ` [Patch] Compare two local RPMs Chenxiong Qi
2016-01-01 0:00 ` [PATCH] Bug 20380 - " Chenxiong Qi
2016-01-01 0:00 ` Dodji Seketeli
2016-01-01 0:00 ` Chenxiong Qi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).