Bug 3008 – rpm returns undef when it should probably return (none) for unknown fields

Bug 3008 - rpm returns undef when it should probably return (none) for unknown fields

Summary:	rpm returns undef when it should probably return (none) for unknown fields

Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX

Aliases:	None

Product:	Red Hat Linux
Classification:	Retired
Component:	rpm (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	6.0
Hardware:	i386 Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Jeff Johnson
QA Contact:
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	1999-05-24 13:49 EDT by jauderho
Modified:	2008-05-01 11:37 EDT (History)
CC List:	0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	1999-08-30 19:28:48 EDT
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description jauderho 1999-05-24 13:49:27 EDT

> BTW there is another bug where if an older rpm does not
know about a
> newer field, it returns undef. I think the correct
behavior is for it to
> return "(none)".
>
> I.e. asking an older rpm about URL returns nothing. It
exposed a bug/
> workaround I had to put in to set undef values.
>

for the record the correct behaviour in this case should be
to return "(none)"

Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2000-10-04 11:10:24 EDT

Returning an explicit "(none)" rather than an error message when querying an
unknown tag
using a legacy version of rpm would confuse two distinct problems
	1) rpm does not know about a tag.
	2) the tag does not exist.
which have different solutions (i.e. 1) is fixed by upgrading rpm, 2) is a
packaging or query option problem).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.