On Jul 16, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jacek Konieczny <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>>> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog, >>>> returns the commits ordered by commit date and not the AuthorDate >>> >> >> Doing qsort(3) on RPMTAG_CHANGELOG* in rpmbuild isn't too hard, might be >> easier than trying to figure out how to trick up git sewage. > > I wonder if RPM really needs to enforce the changelog order. Would it > really hurt if it just allowed building a package with such seemingly > unordered entries? Will anything break if we just disable the test? > Yes loss of "legacy compatibility" would hurt with unordered entries. Nothing would break if all change log entries were ripped out either. (aside) The ordering constraint was likely a quick hack to detect time issues on an alpha miata (knowing almost all of RPM's hysteria). 73 de Jeff > Greets, > Jacek > _______________________________________________ > pld-devel-en mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
