-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Monday 16 July 2007, Jeff Johnson <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Is there any way to automatically create a list of exectuable() and
> > function()
> > provides?
> Depends on what you are expecting.
I'm expecting that RPM does not complain about functions provided or binaries
that *are* installed. :-) For example, all packages using /bin/rm in a shell
script complain that "executable(rm)" is not provided, however, I have the
coreutils package installed, and this one for sure does have a /bin/rm
It does not matter to me whether those "executable(foo)" lines are generated
at build or install time.
> The set
> Provides: executable(...)
> is exactly the files with executable bit set found in directories
> included in PATH.
The "/bin/rm" binary is in path, as one excpetcs.
You explained that "executable(rm)", for example, is added as an requirement
at build time, but found provided at install time, likewise
the "function(blather)" namespace, right? The sad thing is, that this does
not work for me.
I'm currently building "rottlog", a logrotate replacement from GNU.org. It is
a shell script, so this is a good place to watch generation of requirements.
rpmdeps -R correctly generates them, for example:
$ echo /usr/bin/rottlog | /usr/lib/rpm/rpmdeps -R
This first thing that fails are the "function()" lines, because rottlog
provides those methods itself. But when installing, RPM complains
that "function(is_quoted)" is not provided by any package. Similary it goes
with "executable(rm)": /bin/rm comes from the installed "coreutils" package,
but rpm still complains. Also, when examining the package
via "rpm -q --provides", I don't get any "executable(foo)" line:
$ rpm -q --provides coreutils
coreutils = 6.7-1.2ev
Once again, I have no clue where to start looking for the error, but I'm
thankful for any hint. :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Mon Jul 16 22:10:49 2007