[RHELC-67] Add gnome-documents-libs to excluded packages #554
Conversation
|
This has been tested under CentOS 7.9 and Oracle Linux 7.9 |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #554 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 89.26% 89.26%
=======================================
Files 17 17
Lines 2469 2469
Branches 427 427
=======================================
Hits 2204 2204
Misses 203 203
Partials 62 62 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
|
Thanks for adding the integration tests, @danmyway |
| def test_remove_excluded_pkgs_centos8(shell, convert2rhel): | ||
| """Ensure c2r removes pkgs, which specified as excluded_pkgs in config.""" | ||
|
|
||
| excluded_pkg_1 = "gnome-documents-libs" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the only difference from test_remove_excluded_pkgs_epel7.py? If yes, can we have just one test but parametrized?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@r0x0d was the removal of integration test intended?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@danmyway mentioned today he still works on the improving the integration test.
The gnome-documents-libs package is causing file conflicts with gnome-documents during the package transaction as they both share similar files. Signed-off-by: Rodolfo Olivieri <[email protected]>
r0x0d
force-pushed
the
solve-gnome-document-libs-conflict
branch
from
c425db0 to
7ec6727
Compare
* set checked excluded packages as an environment variable * create two test plans for each epel7 and epel8 runs * agregate previously created two tests into one parametrized * edit docstring
|
/packit build |
|
@danmyway my savior! Thanks for adding them back. |
* assert `returncode != 0` rather than `returncode == 1` for cases where more than one package is checked by rpm query
|
The test was failing because of a bad assertion of shell return code. |
The gnome-documents-libs package is causing file conflicts with gnome-documents
during the package transaction as they both share similar files.
Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2043724
Signed-off-by: Rodolfo Olivieri [email protected]