From 2931047efc31f1288788bcdc8bd1d00b53cb9c76 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>

Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:02:23 +0300

Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Issue warning on implicit "%patch zero" variants,

 sanitize semantics

Supporting `%patch` with no number specified, in particular combinations

like `%patch 1` meaning patches 0 and 1 (!), prevents further progress

in this area. Dropping support for these is a case of sawing off a limb

to save the patient, but there's enough history to numberless `%patch`

that we need to take the long route of deprecating it first.

To be exact:

- we now issue a warning on `%patch` where no patch numbers have been

  specified, but assume it to mean Patch0 for now

- `%patch N' applies patch N and nothing else

While at it, avoid an unnecessary strdup() and a dangling buf after

free.

(cherry picked from commit 02b8d8dccc0f045b0ebf81785cf6ad1056cf550e)

---

 build/parsePrep.c | 19 ++++++++-----------

 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/build/parsePrep.c b/build/parsePrep.c

index d92e5cdf0..533de8a2c 100644

--- a/build/parsePrep.c

+++ b/build/parsePrep.c

@@ -380,9 +380,7 @@ exit:

  * - %patchN is equal to %patch -P\<N\>

  * - -P\<N\> -P\<N+1\>... can be used to apply several patch on a single line

  * - Any trailing arguments are treated as patch numbers

- * - Any combination of the above, except unless at least one -P is specified,

- *   %patch is treated as "numberless patch" so that "%patch 1" actually tries

- *   to pull in numberless "Patch:" and numbered "Patch1:".

+ * - Any combination of the above

  *

  * @param spec		build info

  * @param line		current line from spec file

@@ -420,15 +418,8 @@ static rpmRC doPatchMacro(rpmSpec spec, const char *line)

     /* Convert %patchN to %patch -PN to simplify further processing */

     if (! strchr(" \t\n", line[6])) {

 	rasprintf(&buf, "%%patch -P %s", line + 6);

-    } else {

-	/* %patch without a number refers to patch 0 */

-	if (strstr(line+6, " -P") == NULL)

-	    rasprintf(&buf, "%%patch -P %d %s", 0, line + 6);

-	else

-	    buf = xstrdup(line);

     }

-    poptParseArgvString(buf, &argc, &argv);

-    free(buf);

+    poptParseArgvString(buf ? buf : line, &argc, &argv);

     /* 

      * Grab all -P<N> numbers for later processing. Stored as strings

@@ -459,6 +450,11 @@ static rpmRC doPatchMacro(rpmSpec spec, const char *line)

     /* Any trailing arguments are treated as patch numbers */

     argvAppend(&patchnums, (ARGV_const_t) poptGetArgs(optCon));

+    if (argvCount(patchnums) == 0) {

+	rpmlog(RPMLOG_WARNING, _("Patch number not specified: %s\n"), line);

+	argvAdd(&patchnums, "0");

+    }

+

     /* Convert to number, generate patch command and append to %prep script */

     for (patch = patchnums; *patch; patch++) {

 	uint32_t pnum;

@@ -484,6 +480,7 @@ exit:

     free(opt_d);

     free(opt_o);

     free(argv);

+    free(buf);

     poptFreeContext(optCon);

     return rc;

 }

-- 

2.47.0

From a8e821ff5c126613e13277bfd8b2050b71d1ea4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Michal Domonkos <mdomonko@redhat.com>

Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2024 11:57:47 +0200

Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Safeguard against silent Patch0 omission

Commit 02b8d8dccc0f045b0ebf81785cf6ad1056cf550e fixed %patch so that it

no longer applies Patch0 implicitly when used without the -P option.  A

side effect of this is that, if a spec happens to rely on this quirky

behavior, it will now skip Patch0 silently.

To prevent such silent regressions in existing packages, make explicit

Patch0 application mandatory unless all %patch lines in the spec use the

non-ambiguous syntax (i.e. %patchN, %patch -PN or %patch 0).

Basically, this reverts the above commit but replaces the original code

with an error message.

Resolves: RHEL-6294

---

 build/parsePrep.c         | 16 ++++++++++++++++

 build/rpmbuild_internal.h |  3 +++

 build/spec.c              |  3 +++

 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+)

diff --git a/build/parsePrep.c b/build/parsePrep.c

index 533de8a2c..9d64c2141 100644

--- a/build/parsePrep.c

+++ b/build/parsePrep.c

@@ -418,6 +418,10 @@ static rpmRC doPatchMacro(rpmSpec spec, const char *line)

     /* Convert %patchN to %patch -PN to simplify further processing */

     if (! strchr(" \t\n", line[6])) {

 	rasprintf(&buf, "%%patch -P %s", line + 6);

+    } else {

+	/* %patch without a number used to refer to patch 0 */

+	if (strstr(line+6, " -P") == NULL)

+	    spec->patch0_implicit = line;

     }

     poptParseArgvString(buf ? buf : line, &argc, &argv);

@@ -464,6 +468,8 @@ static rpmRC doPatchMacro(rpmSpec spec, const char *line)

 		     *patch, line);

 	    goto exit;

 	}

+	if (pnum == 0)

+	    spec->patch0_explicit = line;

 	s = doPatch(spec, pnum, opt_p, opt_b, opt_R, opt_E, opt_F, opt_d, opt_o, opt_Z);

 	if (s == NULL) {

 	    goto exit;

@@ -516,8 +522,18 @@ int parsePrep(rpmSpec spec)

 	}

     }

+    if (spec->patch0_implicit && !spec->patch0_explicit &&

+	    findSource(spec, 0, RPMBUILD_ISPATCH)) {

+	rpmlog(RPMLOG_ERR, _("Patch0 no longer applied implicitly, pass 0 or -P0: %s\n"),

+	       spec->patch0_implicit);

+	res = PART_ERROR;

+	goto exit;

+    }

+

 exit:

     argvFree(saveLines);

+    spec->patch0_implicit = NULL;

+    spec->patch0_explicit = NULL;

     return res;

 }

diff --git a/build/rpmbuild_internal.h b/build/rpmbuild_internal.h

index 797d27744..545cc1f43 100644

--- a/build/rpmbuild_internal.h

+++ b/build/rpmbuild_internal.h

@@ -132,6 +132,9 @@ struct rpmSpec_s {

     int autonum_patch;

     int autonum_source;

+    const char *patch0_implicit;

+    const char *patch0_explicit;

+

     char * sourceRpmName;

     unsigned char * sourcePkgId;

     Package sourcePackage;

diff --git a/build/spec.c b/build/spec.c

index 6d402319f..72f0d25bd 100644

--- a/build/spec.c

+++ b/build/spec.c

@@ -232,6 +232,9 @@ rpmSpec newSpec(void)

     spec->autonum_patch = -1;

     spec->autonum_source = -1;

+    spec->patch0_implicit = NULL;

+    spec->patch0_explicit = NULL;

+

     spec->sourceRpmName = NULL;

     spec->sourcePkgId = NULL;

     spec->sourcePackage = NULL;

-- 

2.47.0

From 896c7e37d65b1019cc179abcf9524807ba2006d2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Michal Domonkos <mdomonko@redhat.com>

Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 16:10:53 +0100

Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Improve newly added %patch warning/error messages

Make it obvious that the numberless %patch syntax is now *deprecated*

(and thus no longer works in RHEL-10).

Also suggest an actual fix to the user (in both messages), much like we

have for the %patchN warning in RPM 4.19 (see commit

eb5ece1267a22330f6116149997cf5cc1c22b21f).

Kudos to Eva Mrakova for noticing & suggesting this.

Related: RHEL-6294

---

 build/parsePrep.c | 7 ++++---

 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/build/parsePrep.c b/build/parsePrep.c

index 9d64c2141..63014ea89 100644

--- a/build/parsePrep.c

+++ b/build/parsePrep.c

@@ -455,7 +455,8 @@ static rpmRC doPatchMacro(rpmSpec spec, const char *line)

     argvAppend(&patchnums, (ARGV_const_t) poptGetArgs(optCon));

     if (argvCount(patchnums) == 0) {

-	rpmlog(RPMLOG_WARNING, _("Patch number not specified: %s\n"), line);

+	rpmlog(RPMLOG_WARNING, _("%%patch (without a number) is deprecated, "

+				 "add 0 (or -P 0): %s\n"), line);

 	argvAdd(&patchnums, "0");

     }

@@ -524,8 +525,8 @@ int parsePrep(rpmSpec spec)

     if (spec->patch0_implicit && !spec->patch0_explicit &&

 	    findSource(spec, 0, RPMBUILD_ISPATCH)) {

-	rpmlog(RPMLOG_ERR, _("Patch0 no longer applied implicitly, pass 0 or -P0: %s\n"),

-	       spec->patch0_implicit);

+	rpmlog(RPMLOG_ERR, _("%%patch N no longer applies Patch0 implicitly, "

+			     "add 0 (or -P 0): %s\n"), spec->patch0_implicit);

 	res = PART_ERROR;

 	goto exit;

     }

-- 

2.47.0