Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1156129 - Include macros for golang
Summary: Include macros for golang
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1243922
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: redhat-rpm-config
Version: 22
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Florian Festi
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-10-23 15:47 UTC by Vincent Batts
Modified: 2015-07-20 19:37 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-07-20 19:37:41 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
example macros.go to be included (583 bytes, patch)
2014-10-23 15:47 UTC, Vincent Batts 		no flags Details | Diff
View All

Description Vincent Batts 2014-10-23 15:47:04 UTC 
Created attachment 949999 [details]
example macros.go to be included

Description of problem:
Supported architecture macros needed early. Similar to the ocaml arch macros. macros are declared in golang.spec and the golang rpm provides a macros.golang to declare the macros as well.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0-54.fc20.noarch

How reproducible:
n/a

Steps to Reproduce:
1. 
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Question, if I need to provide additional rpm macros for golang packaging convience, can I still have a package like golang-devel to provide a macros.golang for these? (rather than filing bugs against redhat-rpm-config)
Comment 1 Panu Matilainen 2014-10-24 06:48:00 UTC 
Switching to rawhide, that's where these things need to start at.

Please create a separate golang-srpm-macros package for this purpose, we'll make redhat-rpm-config depend on that once done. This way managing future changes and additions remains in your hands, and is where the other similar cases are moving to (see eg bugs #1087794, #1089102 and #1133632)
Comment 2 Vincent Batts 2014-10-24 16:38:49 UTC 
(In reply to Panu Matilainen from comment #1)
> Switching to rawhide, that's where these things need to start at.
> 
> Please create a separate golang-srpm-macros package for this purpose, we'll
> make redhat-rpm-config depend on that once done. This way managing future
> changes and additions remains in your hands, and is where the other similar
> cases are moving to (see eg bugs #1087794, #1089102 and #1133632)

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=587606 now provides a 'golang-srpm-macros' rpm. So, will this be the only thing that redhat-rpm-config need?
Comment 3 Panu Matilainen 2014-10-27 08:24:10 UTC 
For existing architectures that would be fine. However think about bootstrapping new architectures: redhat-rpm-config is among the packages you need before building anything, and if you need to be able to build golang to satisfy its depenencies...

Please create a completely separate package for the srpm-macros which is independent fromthe rest of golang and has no buildrequires at all.
Comment 4 Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client 2014-11-14 07:24:42 UTC 
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database.  Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
Comment 5 Jaroslav Reznik 2015-03-03 16:23:41 UTC 
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 22 development cycle.
Changing version to '22'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/HouseKeeping/Fedora22
Comment 6 Florian Festi 2015-05-29 11:59:51 UTC 
As I have taken over redhat-rpm-config and might miss some context. Do you still need something? And what?
Comment 7 Vincent Batts 2015-07-20 19:37:41 UTC 
closing this in favor of bz1243922

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1243922 ***
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.