Bug 56366
| Summary: | rpm -ihv wrong_pkg_name* (note wildcard) reports no error | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Ralph Rodriguez <ralphr> |
| Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Jeff Johnson <jbj> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 7.2 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i686 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2001-11-16 06:20:24 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
rpm-4.0.3 includes support for manifests, i.e. files with lists of glob expressions, so non-package files are now permitted on the command line. So a non-package file, even one that cannot be interpreted a a list of glob expressions, is no longer an error. And, since a manifest file can contain multiple package instances, the traditional rpm return code of Number of failed packages really doesn't apply anymore. Should the exit code be 1 or 10 if a manifest includes 10 packages? And, if the object doesn't exist at all (this case), shouldn't the return code be 0 == the number of failing objects? The bottom line is that your script is gonna have to do more than check the return code for pathological input. |
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686) Description of problem: Run the following commands in succession: rpm -ihv wrong_pkg_name* echo $? The first command should report an error message; it does not. The second command should report a non-zero status; it reports a zero status. If the wildcard is not used, system acts appropriately. Under 7.1, system acts appropriately. It seems to be a 7.2 specific problem. Same result with rpm -Uhv; I have not tested rpm -Fhv or without the -hv. I have tried it using an ftp url for the pkg name and the problem exists there as well. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. rpm -ihv wrong_pkg_file* 2.echo $? 3. Actual Results: First command reported no error. Second command reports error status of zero. Expected Results: First command should report an error. Second command should report a non-zero status. Additional info: Although it is not a serious bug, it is confusing to new users.