Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Regression of RPM directory management #197

Closed
unomar opened this issue Aug 16, 2016 · 8 comments
Closed

Regression of RPM directory management #197

unomar opened this issue Aug 16, 2016 · 8 comments

Comments

@unomar
Copy link

unomar commented Aug 16, 2016

It appears that a commit between 3.1.0 and 3.2.0 broke the ability to use the workaround specified in issue #59. The test specified in this comment no longer works after gradle-ospackage-plugin version 3.2.0.

@unomar
Copy link
Author

unomar commented Aug 16, 2016

Output from 3.1.0

rpm -qlp build/distributions/foo-1.0.0.noarch.rpm
/opt/test/foo
...

Output from 3.2.0

rpm -qlp build/distributions/foo-1.0.0.noarch.rpm
/opt/test
/opt/test/foo
...

@jfbibeau
Copy link

I'm seeing the same thing with 3.4.0. Looks like addParentDirs doesn't have any effect anymore.

@jfbibeau
Copy link

jfbibeau commented Sep 1, 2016

Note that if you move addParentDirs out of the from closure and into the task itself, it actually works and correctly removes all directories from being managed by the rpm. But then you have to re-add every subdirectory you actually do care about.

@nicknezis
Copy link
Contributor

I'm having this same issue in 4.1.0. But don't really want to make it global to the task. Is this something that can be fixed?

@nicknezis
Copy link
Contributor

I found this behavior in 4.1.0 to change based on if I'm using addParentDirs false and addParentDirs = false. The first doesn't work, but the later does. The Plugin-Rpm.md file states that both methods should be supported, but I'm only having success with the assignment. I'm not sure why this would be handled differently, but hopefully it gives another clue.

@nicknezis
Copy link
Contributor

I think this is related to #124 and #212. I've added a pull request to fix the issue.

@sghill
Copy link
Contributor

sghill commented Dec 15, 2016

Fixed with the release of v4.3.0 today

@sghill sghill closed this as completed Dec 15, 2016
@jonpeterson
Copy link

I don't think this is fixed entirely: #246

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants