[Rpm-metadata] createrepo 0.9.4 traceback with certain changelog data
hpj at urpla.net
Sun Feb 24 12:16:28 UTC 2008
Am Samstag, 23. Februar 2008 schrieb Panu Matilainen:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> > Am Montag, 11. Februar 2008 schrieben Sie:
> >> On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 11:53 +0100, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> >>> Hi Seth,
> >>> I think, it's better to not clutter up the ML with such stuff..
> >>> Attached.
> >> in fedora 8 it shows changelogtime as a list 204 items long.
> > Well the problem is the other way around. Or do you say, that a rpm
> > packeage with a _single_ changelog entry appear as a 204 items long
> > list ;-)
> > Please either test the supplied rpm with exactly _one_ changelog entry,
> > or create one for your one, and test that.
> >> I think it is a suse rpm, thing.
> > If that's the case, then earlier fedora/cent os releases are affected
> > as well, since suse won't change such basic python interface code just
> > for fun..
> Suse might missing this patch in their rpm (not treating changelog time
> as a list always is a bug):
> diff -r 6a6942188e65 -r 08400e947833 python/header-py.c
> --- a/python/header-py.c Tue May 01 05:55:14 2007 +0100
> +++ b/python/header-py.c Thu May 10 12:35:49 2007 +0100
> @@ -537,6 +537,7 @@ static PyObject * hdr_subscript(hdrObjec
> case RPMTAG_CONFLICTNAME:
> case RPMTAG_CONFLICTFLAGS:
> case RPMTAG_CONFLICTVERSION:
> + case RPMTAG_CHANGELOGTIME:
> forceArray = 1;
> case RPMTAG_SUMMARY:
I suspected such a thing, but only investigated the suse rpm build for
suspicious patches. I should have looked into the fedora rpm.spec..
Is it possible to relate this fix to a certain rpm/fedora version? I'm going
to create a backwards compatibility fix for yum (since I'm not willing to
modify rpm only to get the new createrepo going..). If it's predictably
useful beyond suse, I may try harder to create something acceptable
Anyway, thanks for this very helpful hint, Panu.
More information about the Rpm-metadata