Skip to content

Conversation

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

xtask: Fix deprecated default_features

cargo warns about this.


xtask: Sync with bootc

In particular now that we have a git dependency, this turns
out to reveal some deficiencies in how e.g. the Fedora RPM
vendoring support works.

Sync the code from bootc-dev/bootc@58fa21e


contrib/rpm: Sync vendor config from bootc


contrib/rpm: Two more fixes

  • Use rust-%{crate} for name because that's what Fedora
    does; the previous spec file sync was just broken
  • Use a source archive generated from git, not a .crate; we
    will stop publishing to crates.io.

Signed-off-by: Colin Walters walters@verbum.org


In particular now that we have a `git` dependency, this turns
out to reveal some deficiencies in how e.g. the Fedora RPM
vendoring support works.

Sync the code from bootc-dev/bootc@58fa21e
- Use `rust-%{crate}` for name because that's what Fedora
  does; the previous spec file sync was just broken
- Use a source archive generated from git, not a `.crate`; we
  will stop publishing to crates.io.

Signed-off-by: Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
%global crate bootupd

Name: bootupd
Name: rust-%{crate}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this will not create a big issue in Fedora/RHEL? Changing the package name?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is just the source name, and it's already named this in Fedora https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-bootupd but it isn't in RHEL https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/bootupd

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See #838 which introduced this change

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IOW, one pain point we are going to need to eat here is that because it'd be hugely painful (AFAIK) to rename the source package in RHEL, we will have spec file divergence for the forseeable future there.

@cgwalters cgwalters enabled auto-merge February 11, 2025 20:38
@cgwalters cgwalters merged commit c81d20b into coreos:main Feb 11, 2025
12 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants