PR#533: [frontend] require copr-common greater than 0.4 version - copr/copr

copr / copr

#533 [frontend] require copr-common greater than 0.4 version

Merged 5 years ago by frostyx. Opened 5 years ago by frostyx.

copr/ frostyx/copr frontend-require-common-version into master

[frontend] require copr-common greater than 0.4 version

Jakub Kadlčík • 5 years ago

10b1d42

frontend/copr-frontend.spec

file modified

+2 -2

		`@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@`

		`%if %{with check}`
		`BuildRequires: python3-yaml`
		`- BuildRequires: python3-copr-common`
		`+ BuildRequires: python3-copr-common > 0.4`
		`BuildRequires: python3-six`
		`BuildRequires: python3-flask`
		`BuildRequires: python3-flask-script`
		`@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@`
		`Requires: xstatic-datatables-common`
		`Requires: js-html5shiv`
		`Requires: js-respond`
		`- Requires: python3-copr-common`
		`+ Requires: python3-copr-common > 0.4`
		`Requires: (copr-selinux if selinux-policy-targeted)`

		`Provides: bundled(bootstrap-combobox) = 1.1.6`

frostyx commented 5 years ago

We moved helpers.splitFilename to the copr-common package in 15fce28
and therefore we require the version with this function defined.

praiskup commented 5 years ago

IMO we should rather take care of Requires; and the version should be the "one we buidl against" ideally, so we don't have to take care of this anymore.

frostyx commented 5 years ago

But how can we specify the "one we build against"? I thought, that we did it somehow for copr-cli and python3-copr, but no, it looks same like I did it in this PR.

Requires:      python3-copr >= 1.89

praiskup commented 5 years ago

E.g. this works for requests:
%requests_version %(python3 -c 'import requests; print(requests.__version__)' 2>/dev/null || echo 666)

Maybe we could have something similar? Simpler?

praiskup commented 5 years ago

Something similar to

$ cat /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.copr-common
%copr_common_version 0.3

... could work pretty well, too.

rebased onto 10b1d42

5 years ago

Pull-Request has been merged by frostyx

5 years ago

frostyx commented 5 years ago

I am sorry @praiskup, I needed the version specified ASAP because of tomorrows release. We can definitely implement any of the suggested solutions, I am not against that at all, I just needed it now.

praiskup commented 5 years ago

Makes sense, moved to #537. It may be closed if we decide to not do it in the end.