RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Re: RPM5 and YML-like Specfiles

From: Jeff Johnson <n3npq@mac.com>
Date: Sun 10 May 2009 - 23:29:09 CEST
Message-id: <D8427021-5190-4756-84B7-3F33EA1A162A@mac.com>

On May 10, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Eric MSP Veith wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jeff,
>
> I just got the impression YML was the way to go for you to have a  
> grammar
> for *.spec files. It seemed natural to me, since specs and YML  
> already have
> similar looks. I *don't* want any new customized Pimp-my-RPM  
> features. I
> just want to know how *you* want RPM spec files to look like, and  
> want to
> adopt that. (Even if you're going to choose XML, but I'm going to have
> headaches then.)
>

On a more positive note:

The output of
	rpm -qp --yaml *.src.rpm
has most of what I've been able to achieve with
a YAML representation for *.spec build recipes.

That content is pretty close to being sufficient
to drive a build, which achieves a split between
a "proper parser" and the build itself using
a source RPM header as an intermediate representation
of the data needed to drive a build.

Producing a SRPM much earlier, before the build
is actually started, would unsnarl the parsing
from the building. OTOH producing a SRPM earlier
is likely too big of a change for most rpmbuild
users to accomodate (the change is very not hard,
involves mebbe 10 lines of code that define the
mostly linear state machine implmented in rpmbuild).

If a build is driven by a SRPM header, many parsers,
YAML, XML, port(1), etc, could be attempted with
a common back-end build/packaging engine driven by the contents of
data carried in a SRPM header.

73 de Jeff
Received on Sun May 10 23:29:47 2009
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.