Comments
Patch
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ int processPackages(rpmts *ts, int tscount, const char *packagelistfn, int ignor
char *value = NULL;
rc = getPackageStr(ts[i], keys[keyindex], RPMTAG_PACKAGEORIGIN, &value);
if(rc == 0)
- fprintf(outf, " %s\n", value);
+ fprintf(stderr, " %s\n", value);
else
fprintf(stderr, " (%s)\n", keys[keyindex]);
}
@@ -197,10 +197,10 @@ int processPackages(rpmts *ts, int tscount, const char *packagelistfn, int ignor
if( !found ) {
if( ignoremissing ) {
- fprintf(stderr, "unable to find package %s - ignoring\n", line);
+ fprintf(stderr, "Unable to resolve package %s - ignoring\n", line);
}
else {
- fprintf(stderr, "unable to find package %s\n", line);
+ fprintf(stderr, "Unable to resolve package %s\n", line);
missing = 1;
}
}
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "OpenEmbedded RPM resolver - performs RPM database lookups in batc
DEPENDS = "rpm"
LICENSE = "GPLv2"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${COMMON_LICENSE_DIR}/GPL-2.0;md5=801f80980d171dd6425610833a22dbe6"
-PR = "r1"
+PR = "r2"
SRC_URI = "file://rpmresolve.c"
We were mistakenly writing what was meant to go to stderr into the output file, so when the "Multiple matches" error showed we weren't actually seeing the matches printed. Also change the wording of the "Unable to find package..." to "Unable to resolve package..." instead so that it makes more sense if it is printed after the "Multiple matches" error. Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> --- meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpmresolve/rpmresolve.c | 6 +++--- meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpmresolve_1.0.bb | 2 +- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)