linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] kbuild: rpm-pkg: introduce a simple changelog section for kernel.spec

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK7LNAT_b6hmN4W94D_7o5XZAc7jYhBi5rp=GUE=y+_BHjccGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 17:40:16 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To: Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] kbuild: rpm-pkg: introduce a simple changelog
 section for kernel.spec

On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 6:21 AM Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 01:32:56AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 1:45 AM Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Fix the following rpmbuild warning:
> > >
> > >   $ make srcrpm-pkg
> > >   ...
> > >   RPM build warnings:
> > >       source_date_epoch_from_changelog set but %changelog is missing
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  scripts/package/mkspec | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/scripts/package/mkspec b/scripts/package/mkspec
> > > index ce201bfa8377..e45fdb12fbc7 100755
> > > --- a/scripts/package/mkspec
> > > +++ b/scripts/package/mkspec
> > > @@ -28,3 +28,26 @@ cat<<EOF
> > >  EOF
> > >
> > >  cat "${srctree}/scripts/package/kernel.spec"
> > > +
> > > +# collect the user's name and email address for the changelog entry
> > > +if [ "$(command -v git)" ]; then
> > > +       name=$(git config user.name) || true
> > > +       email=$(git config user.email) || true
> > > +fi
> > > +
> > > +if [ ! "${name:+set}" ]; then
> > > +       name=${KBUILD_BUILD_USER:-$(id -nu)}
> > > +fi
> > > +
> > > +if [ ! "${email:+set}" ]; then
> > > +       buildhost=${KBUILD_BUILD_HOST:-$(hostname -f 2>/dev/null || hostname)}
> > > +       builduser=${KBUILD_BUILD_USER:-$(id -nu)}
> > > +       email="${builduser}@...uildhost}"
> > > +fi
> > > +
> > > +cat << EOF
> > > +
> > > +%changelog
> > > +* $(LC_ALL=C; date +'%a %b %d %Y') ${name} <${email}> - ${KERNELRELEASE}
> >
> >
> > I am not sure whether the version is required or not.
> >
> > In the following guide, not all entries have the version.
> >
> >   https://jfearn.fedorapeople.org/en-US/RPM/4/html/RPM_Guide/ch09s06.html
> >
> >
> > If you want to add the version, perhaps is it better to
> > follow the fedora convention?
> >
> >
> > The spec file of Fedora looks as follows.
> > The version is enclosed in the square brackets.
> >
> > %changelog
> > * Wed Dec 13 2023 Augusto Caringi <acaringi@...hat.com> [6.6.7-0]
> > - Add rhbz#2253632 rhbz#2253633 to BugsFixed (Justin M. Forbes)
> > - Turn on DRM_ACCEL drivers for Fedora (Justin M. Forbes)
> > - Linux v6.6.7
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Or, is this not important because there is no strict format?
>
> Darn, I've been using the "- release" pattern for my RPMs for
> quite a long time, as circa 2010 that was the suggestion.
> I guess I just got used to it and never really noticed
> the change along the way.
>
> There's not a strict format, though, and it's just nice
> to have the version showing in there.
> I have no strong feelings about the format we should be
> going to go with, so I'll leave it up to you.
>
> What is the format you'd prefer for the changelog entry?
> Leave it as it is in this patch, or adopt the Fedora standard?
>
> I'll wait for your input before refreshing this patch (or not)


My preference is to get rid of the version number from %changelog
because this is an upstream snapshot source package,
and there is only one entry.

The version number is already expressed in the
"Version:" field.





-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada