On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 6:58 PM Justin Forbes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 12:10 PM Paul Bolle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Justin, > > > > Nobody noticed, so this is just a nit, but ever since the v5.8.14 build for > > fc32 there's this in the fc32 build logs: > > error: %changelog not in descending chronological order > > > > I think what triggers this is that you've recently added extended the > > datestamp on your changelog entries with timestamps. Eg: > > * Wed Oct 7 07:21:23 CDT 2020 Justin M. Forbes > > <[email protected]> - 5.8.14-200 > > Yes, this is what triggers it, and it is added by a change in > rpmdev-bumpspec in F33. I was kind of hoping that rpm would also be > changed to ignore this, so I have not done anything about it. I > suppose I could look into it, but it is just noise at the moment. > > > > > But if the preceding changelog entry doesn't have a timestamp, like: > > * Wed Oct 7 2020 Peter Robinson <[email protected]> > > > > rpmbuild spits out an "error:" but merrily continues the build! (I have no > > idea how that works. Both the timestamp comparison and the build ignoring an > > error.) > > > > Do people care enough to try to fix this? > > With the cause coming from a change in rpmdev-bumpspec, I am guessing > that kernel is not the only package to notice it, though we do use > scripts calling it more than most I suppose. I may look into it, but > from a tooling standpoint, we will likely end up changing a lot of > scripts, so it is fairly low priority at the moment.
The change is due to be reverted to the old date method, details in https://pagure.io/rpmdevtools/issue/63 _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
