Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

adding provider check #11

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 5, 2024
Merged

adding provider check #11

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 5, 2024

Conversation

jason-rodri
Copy link
Collaborator

The requested that there be a consistent way of determining how the fips.so is being built.

Previously we had 3 different spec files one for gitlab dist, github dist, provider

This PR will allow for a single gitlab/github dist

By specifying the provider variable fips.so will be packaged into openssl-libs

the provider spec file will be a subset of the this spec

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ print(string.sub(hash, 0, 16))
Summary: Utilities from the general purpose cryptography library with TLS implementation
Name: openssl
Version: 3.0.7
Release: 27%{?dist}.0.2.2

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know this ship is well sailed, but I'm concerned about bumping at the end here as our dist tags are not very compatible with RHEL/Rocky's. For example, Rocky's dist tag of elMajor[_Minor] in this version, creating 3.0.7-27.el8_10.0.2.2 (for example) will always precede 3.0.7-27.el8_10.ciqfips.0.2.3, because of the .ciqfips being compared against .0.

Copy link

@josephtate josephtate left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks ok to me

@jason-rodri jason-rodri merged commit 0219fdc into dist-git Nov 5, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants