RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Re: Making rpm5 work with dnf

From: Jeffrey Johnson <n3npq@me.com>
Date: Sat 26 Nov 2016 - 00:07:32 CET
Message-id: <597980E4-FE03-43A8-9A19-C3832CF3D302@me.com>

> On Nov 24, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On 11/22/2016 06:10 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> 
>> Again: I cannot do much more than suggest porting approaches unless I can attempt reproducers.
>> Please try to expose your git repositories somehow, either publicly or privately.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> https://github.com/kanavin/libhif/commits/master
> 

Good. I will take a look at your libhif efforts. Note that libhif is only
one of several repositories that are going to be needed.

FWIW, your invitation expired or is otherwise unusable (but at least
I can read your code, todo++).

(aside)
Before we go too much further here:

	What is the intent of this collaboration?

You have chosen to fork libhif from
	rpm-software-management/libhif <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libhif>
rather than a fork (of a fork) from
	https://github.com/rpm5/libhif

That forces our coordination to be pulled from the only common
root at
	rpm-software-management/libhif <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libhif>
which almost certainly precludes any participation from me and rpm5.org
for various reasons.

Note that there are several other efforts attempting a dnf->Ö->rpm5 tool chain that I
am aware of. Which is why I attempted RPM5 repositories to permit collaboration, and
am perfectly willing to give write access to anyone who wishes.

I am also perfectly willing to let someone other than rpm5.org administrate the mess if that
is what is desired. I do encourage all of you to collaborate early and work forward from
working tools. Thereís a fair amount of subtle work that will be needed imho.

What is your intent: collaboration with rpm5.org or collaboration with rpm-software-management?

> I've fixed what I could by adding rpm5 includes, but the remaining build issues are all caused by actual API incompatibilities between 4 and 5. I can file them as separate github issues if you want.
> 

Um rpm5.org and rpm.org have different APIís, and are most definitely different
implementations these days. Its not just include files, and more than libhif is going to
be needed to build a working dnf->Ö->rpm5 tool chain.

Iíll take a look at your libhif this weekend.

73 de Jeff
> Alex
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> RPM Package Manager                                    http://rpm5.org
> User Communication List                             rpm-users@rpm5.org
Received on Sat Nov 26 00:07:36 2016
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.