[git-buildpackage] git-mock [was: Re: Bug#771215: git-buildpackage: please merge support for gbp pq-rpm]

[Guido Günther]

Hi,
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:31:32AM +0100, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 09:05:38AM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:16:37AM +0100, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 02:27:51PM +0100, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 01:22:27PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > ======================================================================
> > > > > ERROR: test suite for <class 'tests.component.rpm.test_pq_rpm.TestPqRpm'>
> > > > 
> > > > Speaking of tests, I think that the following should also be included in
> > > > the branch (unless I missed it elsewhere):
> > > > 
> > > >   http://git.tzafrir.org.il/cgit/git-buildpackage.git/commit/?id=b2d8fa3bdb750ddf974cb605de4e5f0c9b4281cb
> > > > 
> > > > That repo also has a brute-force rebase of buildpackage-rpm on top of
> > > > 0.6.22 (just that command. Others are still missing).
> > > 
> > > On top of that I now have an initial version of --git-mock - using mock
> > > as a chroot builder for rpm packages. I basically copied the way
> > > pbuilder is used (created a separate git-mock and used it as a builder).
> > > Mock is already installed by default with its own permission elavtion
> > > handler.
> > > 
> > > http://git.tzafrir.org.il/cgit/git-buildpackage.git/commit/?h=buildpackage-rpm&id=03e38ad87c882d62ce9f54709fcf8c535edc36fa
> > > 
> > > (I finally have clone URLs listed, but this is a single commit)
> > > 
> > > Basic usage:
> > > 
> > >   gbp buildpackage-rpm --git-mock --git-dist=epel-6
> > > 
> > > Some notes:
> > > * It runs mock twice. Once for generating the srpm and once for
> > >   generating the package from that. This is because some packages have
> > >   platform-dependent macros that may be expanded at srpm-build time.
> > > 
> > >   Avoiding that and using rpmbuild directly would have been faster.
> > > 
> 
> > > * I currently (for the sake of simplicity) avoid interpreting any
> > >   define-s sent in the command line and just assume the spec will be in
> > >   ./SPECS, sources in ./SOURCES, place the SRPM under ./SRPMS (I
> > >   consider it temporary).
> > > 
> > > * I don't have a good default for the resulting files. Currently I place
> > >    the results under ./results/<dist>/<arch>
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > 
> > I've cleaned up the patch a little and applied it to current git. I
> > think assuming that the above directory layout is fine.
> > 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > Avoiding a full build for the SRPM would be nice though, did you make
> > any progress on that one?
> 
> I could do that (and this is what I did originally), but it means I have
> to provide correct defaults for various system-related defines. I
> suspect it should work in many cases but fail (or even fail silently, or
> produce incorrect results) in others.

I was thinking of something along the lines of:

    https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/Makefile#L189

What kind of troubles would you expect?
Cheers,
 -- Guido