Description of problem: The configuration file /etc/opt/rh/rh-mysql57/mecabrc should be marked with appropriate %verify directive in the specfile so that it does not fail the verification. The file is getting modified on installation of rh-mysql57-mecab-ipadic so that it cannot match its properties stored in rpm even after clean install, without any user modification needed. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): rh-mysql57-mecab-0.996-1.el6.7 rh-mysql57-mecab-0.996-1.el7.7 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install rh-mysql57-mecab-ipadic 2. rpm -V rh-mysql57-mecab Actual results: rh-mysql57-mecab.x86_64: /etc/opt/rh/rh-mysql57/mecabrc S.5....T. c Expected results: (no such error) Additional info: https://wiki.test.redhat.com/Faq/Tps/VerifyTest#Summary
The %verify would make also any further changes not being shown. What about this solution: * hardcode the path in the config file during RPM build already * introduce an RPM dependency on rh-mysql57-mecab-ipadic in rh-mysql57-mecab, since ipadic is the only dictionary we provide in the SCL Does this sound fine?
(In reply to Honza Horak from comment #1) > The %verify would make also any further changes not being shown. I know, but that was agreed as being lesser of the two evils, see the link, ask the author about the source of this policy (I vaguely remember some customer complaints in the dark past) ... > What about this solution: > * hardcode the path in the config file during RPM build already > * introduce an RPM dependency on rh-mysql57-mecab-ipadic in > rh-mysql57-mecab, since ipadic is the only dictionary we provide in the SCL > > Does this sound fine? doesn't sound like a solution sustainable in the long-term ... how do we know that no one will want to install different dictionary in the future?
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2016-2723.html