[PATCH] build: fix specfile logic for disabling netcf
I *thought* I had tested all the combinations of manually setting --without netcf, different versions of Fedora, etc, but apparently not. The check in libvirt.spec.in to see if the target was an older Fedora or older RHEL would alway resolve to true, because, e.g., if {?fedora} is undefined, then "0%{?fedora} < 34" is "0 < 34", which is always true. Since both {?fedora} and {?rhel} are never defined at the same time, the result of the entire expression is always true. Fix this by qualifying each subexpression. Fixes: 35d5b26aa433bd33f4b33be3dbb67313357f97f9 Signed-off-by: Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com> --- libvirt.spec.in | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/libvirt.spec.in b/libvirt.spec.in index 34b481c69e..29b476184d 100644 --- a/libvirt.spec.in +++ b/libvirt.spec.in @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ %define with_firewalld_zone 0%{!?_without_firewalld_zone:1} %endif -%if 0%{?fedora} < 34 || 0%{?rhel} < 9 +%if (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} < 34) || (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} < 9) %define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1} %endif -- 2.29.2
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:05:04PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
I *thought* I had tested all the combinations of manually setting --without netcf, different versions of Fedora, etc, but apparently not.
The check in libvirt.spec.in to see if the target was an older Fedora or older RHEL would alway resolve to true, because, e.g., if {?fedora} is undefined, then "0%{?fedora} < 34" is "0 < 34", which is always true. Since both {?fedora} and {?rhel} are never defined at the same time, the result of the entire expression is always true.
Fix this by qualifying each subexpression.
Fixes: 35d5b26aa433bd33f4b33be3dbb67313357f97f9 Signed-off-by: Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com> --- libvirt.spec.in | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 13:05 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
-%if 0%{?fedora} < 34 || 0%{?rhel} < 9 +%if (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} < 34) || (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} < 9) %define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1} %endif
You could also replace the existing %define with_netcf 0 that appears earlier in the file with %define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1} and rewrite this version check with %if 0%{?fedora} > 33 || %{?rhel} > 8 %define with_netcf 0 %endif instead. This would keep the version check simpler. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On 2/3/21 5:46 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 13:05 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
-%if 0%{?fedora} < 34 || 0%{?rhel} < 9 +%if (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} < 34) || (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} < 9) %define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1} %endif You could also replace the existing
%define with_netcf 0
that appears earlier in the file with
%define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1}
and rewrite this version check with
%if 0%{?fedora} > 33 || %{?rhel} > 8 %define with_netcf 0 %endif
instead. This would keep the version check simpler.
I thought about that, but it would make the default be "enabled", and I want the default to be "disabled".
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 10:50 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
On 2/3/21 5:46 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
You could also replace the existing
%define with_netcf 0
that appears earlier in the file with
%define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1}
and rewrite this version check with
%if 0%{?fedora} > 33 || %{?rhel} > 8 %define with_netcf 0 %endif
instead. This would keep the version check simpler.
I thought about that, but it would make the default be "enabled", and I want the default to be "disabled".
In name only, given that you'd override it for most platforms later. Alternatively, something like %if 0%{?fedora} > 33 || %{?rhel} > 8 %define with_netcf 0 %else %define with_netcf 0%{!?_without_netcf:1} %endif would work too. But, so does your current version, so feel free to just pick up Dan's R-b and push the patch as-is :) -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
participants (4)
-
Andrea Bolognani -
Daniel P. Berrangé -
Laine Stump -
Laine Stump