I changed the date in changelog "Sat Jun 30 2018" --> "Sun Jun 30 2019" and it
works as expected.
@pmatilai Thanks a lot for a temporary (2 years) workaround. It is definitely
better with this workaround than just disabling my unit tests. But the
behaviour is really ugly and hidden.
--
You
Hi,
recently unit tests for `rpkg` tool started failing. I found, that `rpm`
returns a different result than before.
I have simple specfile:
```
Summary: Dummy summary
Name: docpkg
Version: 1.2
Release: 2%{dist}
License: GPL
#Source0:
#Patch0:
Group: Applications/Productivity
BuildRoot: %(mktemp
```
/repo/docpkg$ rpm -q --qf "%{NAME} %{CHANGELOGTEXT}\n" --specfile "docpkg.spec"
docpkg (none)
/repo/docpkg$ rpm -qa | grep -w rpm
rpm-4.15.1-2.fc31.x86_64
rpm-sign-libs-4.15.1-2.fc31.x86_64
systemd-rpm-macros-243.8-1.fc31.noarch
rpm-build-4.15.1-2.fc31.x86_64
rpm-libs-4.15.1-2.fc31.x86_64
`rpm -q --qf "[%{CHANGELOGTEXT}\n]" --specfile "docpkg.spec"`
returns exit code 0 and empty result
If `rpm` behaviour is correct, is there other way how to format the query or
modify the specfile to get last changelog record?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
And here they are. I update the lockfile format with items `checksum` and
(file) `size`. There is also an expansion in the header (two new records:
`lockfileVendor` and `lockfileType` - that distinguishes between _rpms.in.yaml_
and _rpms.lock.yaml_).
--
Reply to this email directly or view it
# [JFYI] Introduction of _rpms.lock.yaml_ file
## Context
My team is currently working on the implementation of a hermetic build process
for containers that use RPMs. The build process runs in a network-isolated
build environment. To be able to implement this, we need to pre-fetch all
OK, fixed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2908#discussioncomment-8559597
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
