classification
Title: AssertionError when building rpm under RedHat 9.1
Type: Stage:
Components: Distutils Versions:
process
Status: closed Resolution: wont fix
Dependencies: Superseder:
Assigned To: jafo Nosy List: georg.brandl, jafo, loewis, niederberger (4)
Priority: normal Keywords: patch

Created on 2003-05-02 12:56 by niederberger, last changed 2006-06-13 12:09 by jafo.

Files
File name Uploaded Description Edit Remove
bdistrpmrh9.diff niederberger, 2003-05-02 12:56 bdist_rpm patch
Messages (6)
msg43575 - (view) Author: Ricardo Niederberger Cabral (niederberger) Date: 2003-05-02 12:56 
When trying to build an rpm on RH 9:

From distutils __version__ = "1.0.3":

  File "distutils/command/bdist_rpm.py", line 316, in run
    assert len(rpms) == 1, \
AssertionError: unexpected number of RPM files found: ['build/bdist.
linux-i686/rpm/RPMS/i386/imgSeek-0.7-1.i386.rpm', 'build/bdist.
linux-i686/rpm/RPMS/i386/imgSeek-debuginfo-0.7-1.i386.rpm']

I had to remove the assert statement on bdist_rpm.py:316 in order to 
build my rpm since rpmbuild from RH always seems to generate this 
extra  -debuginfo rpm.

So attached is a patch (cvs rev 1.37) to simply copy all generated 
RPM's to the dist/ directory.
msg43576 - (view) Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) Date: 2003-05-03 11:01 
Logged In: YES 
user_id=21627

Can you provide more information? What rpm gets generated,
and what files does it contain?
msg43577 - (view) Author: Ricardo Niederberger Cabral (niederberger) Date: 2003-05-28 01:59 
Logged In: YES 
user_id=354686

Sorry for not replying faster and providing more info. SF tracker didn't email 
me about your comment, and I don't have the RH system at hand right now.
Anyway, it generates:
foo-version.i386.rpm
foo-version.src.rpm
foo-debuginfo-version.i386.rpm
instead of only the binary and src rpm's I would get on Mandrake 9 for 
example, which is what bdist_rpm.py currently expects.

I don't know exactly what goes inside this debug-info rpm, but i guess it's 
probably the binary one compiled with debug symbols on. I can provide 
more info if necessary in a few days.
msg43578 - (view) Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) Date: 2005-03-03 14:36 
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1188172

Does anyone still care about this issue?

Or, other way round, does anything speak against applying
and so copying all RPMs?
msg43579 - (view) Author: Sean Reifschneider (jafo) Date: 2006-05-22 08:52 
Logged In: YES 
user_id=81797

Is 1.0.3 from the Red Hat RPMs, the python.org RPMs (which
version), or directly downloaded from the distutils?  If
this is an issue in Distutils, I'd be interested in still
fixing it.  However, there hasn't been any activity on this
in 3 years, so I'm planning on closing this unless I hear
something further over, say, the next few weeks.

Red Hat 9.1 is extremely legacy now, of course.  Not at all
supported for errata by either Red Hat or the other Legacy
sites, so I'm inclined to feel the same.
msg43580 - (view) Author: Sean Reifschneider (jafo) Date: 2006-06-13 12:09 
Logged In: YES 
user_id=81797

No activity on this in the last several weeks.  This is
fixed in newer Fedora releases, and Red Hat 9.1 is no longer
supported by Legacy projects.
History
Date User Action Args
2003-05-02 12:56:45niederbergercreate