[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and i
From: |
bluca at debian dot org |
Subject: |
[Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile |
Date: |
Fri, 09 Aug 2024 20:37:07 +0000 |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003
--- Comment #24 from Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian dot org> ---
(In reply to Benjamin Drung from comment #23)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #14)
> > (In reply to Benjamin Drung from comment #13)
> >
> > > > Will "%[string]" escape work?
> > >
> > > Like this?
> > >
> > > -Wl,--encoded-package-metadata={%[quot]type%[quot]:
> > > %[quot]deb%[quot]%[comma]%[quot]os%[quot]:
> > > %[quot]ubuntu%[quot]%[comma]%[quot]name%[quot]:
> > > %[quot]dpkg%[quot]%[comma]%[quot]version%[quot]:%[quot]1.22.
> > > 6ubuntu15%[quot]%[comma]%[quot]architecture%[quot]:%[quot]amd64%[quot]}
> >
> > It should be %[quote]".
>
> You suggested to borrow from HTML's Named Character References and
> https://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-LC/named-character-references.html says that
> U+00022 has the name "quot" (not "quote").
>
> > Will adding support for "%[string]" to existing
> > --package-metadata option break anything?
>
> It might theoretical break existing use cases.
>
> --package-metadata='{"version":"1.0%2"}'
Are there distros where '%' is an allowed character in a version string or a
package name? I care about backward compatibility, but we can be sensible about
it, and if in practice it's not a problem, then it's fine to do such a change
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile,
bluca at debian dot org <=
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bluca at debian dot org, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bluca at debian dot org, 2024/08/10
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, dilfridge at gentoo dot org, 2024/08/10
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/08/10
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/12