Upgrade: osinfo-db version to 20240701 #11495
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jykanase
force-pushed
the
topic_osinfo-db
branch
from
e623c34 to
8245ad4
Compare
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
Packaging
specs-extended
jykanase
force-pushed
the
topic_osinfo-db
branch
from
8245ad4 to
8212e02
Compare
suresh-thelkar
requested changes
Dec 26, 2024
| %define with_mingw 0 | ||
| %if 0%{?fedora} | ||
| %define with_mingw 0%{!?_without_mingw:1} | ||
| %endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We will not be using mingw and fedora macros. Can you please clean up the spec file.
| Summary: osinfo database files | ||
| Name: osinfo-db | ||
| Version: 20240701 | ||
| Release: 3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this is upgrade we need to reset the release to 1%{?dist}
| BuildArch: noarch | ||
| Requires: hwdata | ||
|
|
||
| %if %{with_mingw} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here also we do not use mingw related macros. Please clean it up.
|
|
||
| %if %{with_mingw} | ||
| osinfo-db-import --root %{buildroot} --dir %{mingw32_datadir}/osinfo %{SOURCE0} | ||
| osinfo-db-import --root %{buildroot} --dir %{mingw64_datadir}/osinfo %{SOURCE0} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No need to use rhel and mingw related macros. Apply this comment to other parts of the spec file wherever needed.
jykanase
force-pushed
the
topic_osinfo-db
branch
from
8212e02 to
ea9131f
Compare
|
Updated the changes |
| BuildArch: noarch | ||
| Source0: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/libosinfo/%{name}-%{version}.tar.xz | ||
| Source1: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/libosinfo/%{name}-%{version}.tar.xz.asc | ||
| URL: http://libosinfo.org/ |
jykanase
force-pushed
the
topic_osinfo-db
branch
from
ea9131f to
0b3bff2
Compare
|
@jykanase, Unified buddy build is failing. Can you please look into it and fix the issue. |
|
It is not leaf PR, I will look it after all leaf PR get merged |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Merge Checklist
All boxes should be checked before merging the PR (just tick any boxes which don't apply to this PR)
*-staticsubpackages, etc.) have had theirReleasetag incremented../cgmanifest.json,./toolkit/scripts/toolchain/cgmanifest.json,.github/workflows/cgmanifest.json)./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/data/licenses.json,./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSES-MAP.md,./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSE-EXCEPTIONS.PHOTON)*.signatures.jsonfilessudo make go-tidy-allandsudo make go-test-coveragepassSummary
Upgrade: osinfo-db version to 20240701
Build/Dependency Information
osinfo-db-tools
Change Log
Does this affect the toolchain?
NO
Associated issues
Links to CVEs
Test Methodology