On 01.12.2015 15:41, Paweł Gołaszewski wrote:
My fault, forgot to change count :-/
Anyway - glen is right, rpm should reject that...
well. you did not adjust the patch range, so the patch scope stayed the
same, effectively cut out last line from patch.
the same what jacek said in later thread.
i guess there's no way to fight against such specific failure except
some automated function testing?
ps:
i do create pld vagrant images regularily [1] that had catched some sshd
setup errors in the past [2]
but it's not built automatically, only when i hit "build".
[1] https://www.pld-linux.org/people/glen/vm-info
[2]
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-en/2015-November/024554.html
--
glen
_______________________________________________
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
