From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A60C67AFB6; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:04:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9CAAD1B363; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:04:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:04:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 41DF540FD0; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:04:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4635012a-e838-933f-3fbf-77946e54db89@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:04:01 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 From: Fabian Ebner To: Wolfgang Bumiller Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20220706085419.45987-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20220706111318.rav6ba2wi3omt2vq@casey.proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20220706111318.rav6ba2wi3omt2vq@casey.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.047 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [common.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-perl-rs] move apt repositories module to common X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 07:04:08 -0000 Am 06.07.22 um 13:13 schrieb Wolfgang Bumiller: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:54:17AM +0200, Fabian Ebner wrote: >> while introducing a 'product' parameter to the relevant functions. >> >> Suggested-by: Wolfgang Bumiller >> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner >> --- >> >> I did the changes in Proxmox/Lib/Common.pm (and Makefile) manually. >> Is that the intended way or could I have generated those somehow? >> >> Hope I got these right: >> >> pve-manager (respectively pmg-api) depends and build-depends on >> libproxmox-rs-perl and libpve-rs-perl (respectively libpmg-rs-perl). >> Both are needed, because just upgrading libproxmox-rs-perl doesn't >> make the new functionality available in the product-specific shared >> lib. >> >> New libpve-rs-perl breaks old pve-manager and new libpmg-rs-perl >> breaks old pmg-api. > > I mean in theory we could keep the old functions and just have them > forward to the common module with the corresponding product parameter > added, for a little while anyway? > Sure, I can send a v2 doing that to postpone the "Breaks". >> diff --git a/Proxmox/Lib/Common.pm b/Proxmox/Lib/Common.pm >> index d8a0d57..668986d 100644 >> --- a/Proxmox/Lib/Common.pm >> +++ b/Proxmox/Lib/Common.pm >> @@ -6,6 +6,14 @@ Proxmox::Lib::Common - base module for rust bindings common between PVE and PMG >> >> =head1 SYNOPSIS >> >> + package Proxmox::RS::APT::Repositories; >> + >> + use base 'Proxmox::Lib::Common'; >> + >> + BEGIN { __PACKAGE__->bootstrap(); } >> + >> + 1; >> + > > This is just example documentation, no need to do anything to this file > at all. > Right :)