The algorithm used for installing hardlinks does not handle the case where a
package upgrade includes additional names for an inode. It iterates the list of
files from the beginning until the end and only writes content and metadata for
the last occurence of an inode.
For upgrades, there is no h
if you have a spec file having multiple %package and %files sections
and you have
%files packOne
missingOne
%files packTwo
missingTwo
rpmbuild will fail with
Processing files: packOne
error: File not found: missingOne
RPM build errors:
File not found: missingOne
You have to correct packOne,
Can you elaborate more please? What missing / unpacked files, waht subpackages,
what report?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1277#issuecomment-646655800__
The current implementation reports missing or unpacked files just for one
package and not for all subpackes. This leads to massive rebuilds. It would be
much easier for all packagers, if you allways get a full report of missing,
unpacked or duplicate files.Currently this is really time consumin
