On 17 December 2012 17:25, Thierry Vignaud <[email protected]> wrote: > Humm, the new pool API has side effects. > There was a bug in URPM where it would sometimes create empty transactions. > With previous releases of rpm, that was harmless but now rpm abort with: > > perl: rpmal.c:98: rpmalCreate: Assertion `pool != ((void *)0)' failed.
(...) > I've fixed the underneath bug in URPM but I think it would be better > not to fail in such a way. > It's not a "regression" that would affect lot of users but it may > break other package managers. > It would be better to return if no packages has been added to the transaction. Eg, for the record, this is breaking perl-RPM4 too... _______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
