Commit graph jw-pkg/test/unit/python/jw/pkg/lib/version/test.py
Author SHA1 Message Date
c31dfb4bbf
lib.version.Dependency: Reject unsupported spec operators
All checks were successful
CI / Packaging - Kali Linux (pull_request) Successful in 4m27s
CI / Packaging - OpenSUSE Tumbleweed (pull_request) Successful in 4m54s
CI / Packaging test (pull_request) Successful in 0s
CI / Packaging - Kali Linux (push) Successful in 4m0s
CI / Packaging - OpenSUSE Tumbleweed (push) Successful in 4m17s
CI / Packaging test (push) Successful in 0s
The spec split pattern ([=><]+) tokenizes only the =, > and < characters,
so a PEP 440 operator like ~= or != leaves its ~ or ! glued to the package
name: Dependency('pkg~=1.0') parses to base name 'pkg~' with operator '='.
App.__get_project_refs() carries the same pattern inline, so the same specs
corrupt the module name used for the -devel subpackage check. The split
also tolerates operator strings the language does not support, most visibly
==, which parses and renders but raises NotImplementedError only when
expansion is requested.

The spec language supports exactly =, <, <=, > and >=, and boundary
expansion implements all of them. Extend the split pattern with ~ and ! so
that foreign operators tokenize as operator strings, and reject every
operator outside the supported set in Dependency.__parsed_spec() with
Dependency.Error, naming the supported operators. Route
App.__get_project_refs() through Dependency for the name and module parts
instead of the second inline split, so the validation lives in one place.
The catch all in Dependency.__version_boundaries() stays as a backstop
against drift between the allow list and the expansion cases.

The tests drop == from the accepted operator loop, drop the now-unreachable
not-expandable case, and assert that ~=, !=, ~, ==, ===, << and >> are
rejected at parse time with a message naming the operator.

Assisted-by: unsloth/Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M with pi.dev v0.85.1
Signed-off-by: Jan Lindemann <jan@janware.com>
2026-09-11 11:22:33 +02:00
6b13ae1212
lib.version.Dependency: Beautify exceptions
Add a dependent_package parameter to Dependency's constructor, and use it
in exceptions the class raises.
2026-09-10 09:52:13 +02:00
c9cbef15bb lib.version: Add module to parse dependency specs
pkg_relations() parses dependency specifications such as 'foo-devel >=
1.2.3-4' with inline regular expressions and mixes the parsing with version
macro expansion and rendering in three different syntaxes.

This commit adds the lib.version module that owns the parsing of a single
specification: the base and full name and the version boundary with its
operator. Rendering happens in constraint_str() in SEM_VER, DEBIAN or
NAMES_ONLY syntax, with untemplated, include_revision, as_range,
no_subpackages and quote options. The VERSION, VERSION-REVISION and
REVISION macros are resolved through a version lookup callback,
lib.version.Version.parse_deps_spec() splits comma-separated specification
strings into Version objects, and Version breaks a version down into its
major, minor, micro and revision parts.

Unit tests cover parsing, macro resolution, rendering in all syntaxes and
the range expansion.

The module is designed to be integrated into the status quo and
intentionally does not address a couple of further TODOs. Notably
version.Syntax.SEM_VER is intended to replace
pkg_relations.VersionSyntax.SemVer, but neither are really semantic
versioning according to spec. They are close but more targeted toward RPM
and Debian package versioning. And the naming and semantics differ from
SemVer.

Naming of the four components (major and minor version) is identical,
semantic meaning aside, there's no disagreement between real SemVer,
Debian, RPM and jw-pkg. The third and fourth component deviate:

    SemVer      Debian      RPM        jw-pkg      lib.version
 3  PATCH                              RELEASE     MICRO
 4  PRERELEASE  Revision    Release    REVISION    REVISION

TODOs: RELEASE over the rest of jw-pkg needs to be adjusted by a later
commit. Syntax.SEM_VER should also be renamed, to Syntax.JW_PKG maybe,
because, as said, it's not SemVer and will probably never be - SemVer
doesn't provide the compatibility guarantees that the jw-pkg versioning
scheme offers. To be documented.

Signed-off-by: Jan Lindemann <jan@janware.com>
2026-09-09 15:37:50 +02:00