prjconf Release: breaks debs’ debian revision

[drmuey]

TL;DR:

Doing the classic Release: %%{?release_prefix}.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT> in prjconf breaks debian revision.

1. set OBS-DCH-RELEASE: 1:
   • 🟢 deb is VERSION+release_prefix.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT>
   • 🔴 rpm is VERSION-release_prefix
2. add Release: %%{?release_prefix}.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT> in prjconf
   • 🔴 deb is VERSION+release_prefix.
   • 🟢 rpm is VERSION-release_prefix.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT>

Details:

Oultined here ➜ https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/554631

Cause?

I believe is caused by this line being too greedy and clearing Release completely:

obs-build/build-recipe-dsc

Line 52 in d8665ae

DEB_RELEASE=`sed 's/%.*$//' <<< $RELEASE`

Using this regexp (properly escaped of course) would demonstrate if that belief was justified or not: s/%+\{[^}]+}\.?// (should allow the classic example to work but is a bit naive still)

There is probably a better regexp or logic to “remove rpm macros” as the comment above that line says its intent.

something like this for example: s/(\.)?%+\{[^}]+}(\.)?/$1 && $2 ? $2 : ""/eg would cover multiples

In addition to multiples they can be nested too of course

[ColMelvin]

To handle macros with macros embedded in them, e.g. %{expand: %%{mymacro}%%{mysuffix}}, there will need to be a more complicated regex. An example (in Perl) might be:

s/
    (?(DEFINE)
        (?<MACRO> %\{ (?&EXPANSION) \} | %(?&VARIABLE) | %\*\* | %[*#%] )
        (?<EXPANSION> [^%]+ | [^%]* (?: (?&MACRO) [^%]* )+ )
        (?<VARIABLE> \w+ )
    )
    (?&MACRO)\.?
//xg;

I don't think this solution will work well with parameterized macro calls (e.g %mymacro 5), so further iteration may be required.

[drmuey]

@ColMelvin and I were able to verify that this is indeed the problem 👍

We get it to work w/ a simplified regex that will only work on the classic prjconf Release: %%{?release_prefix}.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT> (lots of escape issues and special character oddness leyt along complexities of macro format).

First, thi sgot us the correct DEB_RELEASE:

--- build-recipe-dsc.orig	2021-06-01 12:49:32.606955951 -0500
+++ build-recipe-dsc	2021-06-01 14:42:17.490308842 -0500
@@ -49,7 +49,10 @@
     done
     # remove rpm macros (everything after "%")
     # they are not evaluated by the Debian build process
-    DEB_RELEASE=`sed 's/%.*$//' <<< $RELEASE`
+    DEB_RELEASE=`sed 's/%..release_prefix..//' <<< $RELEASE`
     OBS_DCH_RELEASE=""
 
     if test -n "$DEB_TRANSFORM" ; then 
     ```
     
Some debuggery showed that `DEB_RELEASE` correctly had `%{?release_prefix}.` removed but we still had an error like `version '1.0-53+%{?release_prefix}.53.2.cpanel' is invalid: version number`.

That seemed to indicate something was using `RELEASE` when it should be using `DEB_RELEASE` (a second bug maybe?) so we tried this patch:

--- build-recipe-dsc.orig 2021-06-01 12:49:32.606955951 -0500
+++ build-recipe-dsc 2021-06-01 14:56:04.743476406 -0500
@@ -49,7 +49,11 @@
done
# remove rpm macros (everything after "%")
# they are not evaluated by the Debian build process

• DEB_RELEASE=sed 's/%.*$//' <<< $RELEASE

• RELEASE=sed 's/%..release_prefix..//' <<< $RELEASE
• DEB_RELEASE=$RELEASE
• OBS_DCH_RELEASE=""
  if test -n "$DEB_TRANSFORM" ; then

and it worked!

by “worked” I mean:

* version is 1.0, `release_prefix` is 53 (in debian/ by virtue of the changelog)
* projconf had `Release: %%{?release_prefix}.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT>`
* `.dsc` had `OBS-DCH-RELEASE: 1`
   * this will also fix it for anyone using `DEB_TRANSFORM` and not `OBS-DCH-RELEASE`
* when they built:
    * 🟢 RPM was v1.0-53.53.4
    * 🟢 deb was v1.0-53+53.2

HTH, thanks!

[drmuey]

Perhaps Iteration 1 is: support the standard Release: %%{?release_prefix}.<CI_CNT>.<B_CNT> for debs

Then Iteration 2: make the regexp smarter

If that sounds like a good plan I’d be happy to do a pull request (NTS ¿backport to 2.10 so no maintaining patch locally?)

[drmuey]

PR #698