Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Mock build can produce two SRPM packages in the results directory #1344

Open
FrostyX opened this issue Mar 5, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Mock build can produce two SRPM packages in the results directory #1344

FrostyX opened this issue Mar 5, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@FrostyX
Copy link
Member

FrostyX commented Mar 5, 2024

Short description of the problem

When using rpmautospec (or probably any other way to dynamically generate version or release number, Mock can generate multiple SRPM packages in the results directory.

We should either fix it or let Mock gracefully fail, refusing to finish such a build.

Output of rpm -q mock

mock-5.5-1.fc39.noarch

Steps to reproduce issue

  1. Make sure the results directory is empty sudo rm -rf /var/lib/mock/fedora-40-x86_64/result/*
  2. Download the spec file and sources tarball attached to this issue
  3. Sorry, GitHub doesn't support spec files mv hello.spec.txt hello.spec
  4. mock -r fedora-40-x86_64 --sources hello-2.12.1.tar.gz --spec hello.spec
  5. ls /var/lib/mock/fedora-40-x86_64/result |grep src.rpm

Example output:

hello-2.12.1-1709662065.fc40.src.rpm
hello-2.12.1-1709662068.fc40.src.rpm

Also, the final RPM filename differs from both of them - hello-2.12.1-1709662074.fc40.x86_64.rpm

Any additional notes

We encountered this issue several times in Copr and it was always confusing and hard to debug. Last reported case was fedora-copr/copr#3110

@FrostyX
Copy link
Member Author

FrostyX commented Mar 5, 2024

I am pasting the whole specfile here for easier reading in the browser

## START: Set by rpmautospec
## (rpmautospec version 0.6.1)
## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
    -- Packages use something like this:
    -- release_number = 18;
    -- base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}"));
    -- print(release_number + base_release_number - 1);

    -- But a more reliable reproducer is the following
    print(os.time())
}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}}
## END: Set by rpmautospec

Name:           hello
Version:        2.12.1
Release:        %autorelease
Summary:        Prints a familiar, friendly greeting
# All code is GPLv3+.
# Parts of the documentation are under GFDL
License:        GPL-3.0-or-later AND GFDL-1.3-or-later
URL:            https://www.gnu.org/software/hello/
Source0:        https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-%{version}.tar.gz

BuildRequires:  gcc
BuildRequires:  gnupg2
BuildRequires:  make
Recommends:     info
Provides:       bundled(gnulib)

%description
The GNU Hello program produces a familiar, friendly greeting.
Yes, this is another implementation of the classic program that
prints “Hello, world!” when you run it.

However, unlike the minimal version often seen, GNU Hello processes
its argument list to modify its behavior, supports greetings in many
languages, and so on. The primary purpose of GNU Hello is to
demonstrate how to write other programs that do these things; it
serves as a model for GNU coding standards and GNU maintainer
practices.


%prep
%setup -q


%build
%configure
%make_build


%install
%make_install
rm -f %{buildroot}%{_infodir}/dir
%find_lang hello


%files -f hello.lang
%license COPYING
%{_mandir}/man1/hello.1*
%{_bindir}/hello
%{_infodir}/hello.info*


%changelog
%autochangelog

@FrostyX
Copy link
Member Author

FrostyX commented Mar 6, 2024

It is also worth mentioning that this issue happens only when calling mock with --spec and --sources. If you specify a SRPM on the input, there will be only one SRPM in the results directory. Even though with a different release number than the original (I think this is fine).

@xsuchy xsuchy moved this from Needs triage to In 3 months in CPT Kanban Mar 6, 2024
@xsuchy
Copy link
Member

xsuchy commented Mar 6, 2024

Note for myself: maybe this can be reproduced by %generatebuildrequires that makes more src.rpm.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants