autopatch/java-21-openjdk
5
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Activity

fix(autopatch): Removed four obsolete actions from config-portable-riscv64.yaml whose %%{nil} fix was already absorbed upstream. #1

Merged
eabdullin merged 1 commits from agent-fix/a8-20260723-010949 into a8 2026-07-23 07:28:58 +00:00
Conversation 0 Commits 1 Files Changed 1 -24
eabdullin commented 2026-07-23 01:09:50 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Automated fix by autopatch agent.

Summary: Removed four obsolete actions from config-portable-riscv64.yaml whose %%{nil} fix was already absorbed upstream.

Root cause

The error was ActionNotAppliedError on find: "jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}" in config-portable-riscv64.yaml.

The upstream portable specfile (java-21-openjdk-portable.specfile, c8 branch) already contains the RPM 4.19 %%{nil} fix (changelog entry dated 2026-06-26, OPENJDK-4887):

  • It now defines jreportablearchive_for_files(), jdkportablearchive_for_files(), and staticlibsportablearchive_for_files() macros
  • The %files sections use these _for_files() variants — no %%{nil} remains there

As a result, four actions in the config were obsolete (case a — absorbed upstream):

  1. The block that added jreportablearchiveForFiles / jdkportablearchiveForFiles / staticlibsportablearchiveForFiles macros after %define miscportablearchive() — upstream already provides the equivalent _for_files() macros
  2. find: "jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}" → replace with jreportablearchiveForFiles — no more %%{nil} in %files sections
  3. find: "jdkportablearchive -- %%{nil}" → replace with jdkportablearchiveForFiles — same reason
  4. find: "staticlibsportablearchive -- %%{nil}" → replace with staticlibsportablearchiveForFiles — same reason

The two remaining replace actions (adding riscv64 to ARCH_DATA_MODEL=64 and inserting the riscv64 debug_package %{nil} block) still apply correctly and were left unchanged.

Original error

Type: ActionNotAppliedError

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/webserv.py", line 89, in debrand_packages
    result = apply_modifications(
  File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/debranding.py", line 136, in apply_modifications
    config.apply_actions(rpms_working_dir + f"/{package}")
  File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 938, in apply_actions
    action.execute(Path(package_path))
  File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 475, in execute
    process_lines(
  File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 236, in process_lines
    raise ActionNotAppliedError(
actions_handler.ActionNotAppliedError: Action 'ReplaceAction' was not applied successfully: No changes made for '['jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}']' in /root/autopatch-tool/src/autopatch-java-21-openjdk-6twj4hf1/rpms-namespace/java-21-openjdk/SPECS/java-21-openjdk.spec

Package: java-21-openjdk | Webhook branch: c8

Automated fix by autopatch agent. **Summary:** Removed four obsolete actions from config-portable-riscv64.yaml whose %%{nil} fix was already absorbed upstream. ### Root cause The error was `ActionNotAppliedError` on `find: "jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}"` in `config-portable-riscv64.yaml`. The upstream portable specfile (`java-21-openjdk-portable.specfile`, c8 branch) already contains the RPM 4.19 `%%{nil}` fix (changelog entry dated 2026-06-26, OPENJDK-4887): - It now defines `jreportablearchive_for_files()`, `jdkportablearchive_for_files()`, and `staticlibsportablearchive_for_files()` macros - The `%files` sections use these `_for_files()` variants — no `%%{nil}` remains there As a result, four actions in the config were **obsolete (case a — absorbed upstream)**: 1. The block that added `jreportablearchiveForFiles` / `jdkportablearchiveForFiles` / `staticlibsportablearchiveForFiles` macros after `%define miscportablearchive()` — upstream already provides the equivalent `_for_files()` macros 2. `find: "jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}"` → replace with `jreportablearchiveForFiles` — no more `%%{nil}` in `%files` sections 3. `find: "jdkportablearchive -- %%{nil}"` → replace with `jdkportablearchiveForFiles` — same reason 4. `find: "staticlibsportablearchive -- %%{nil}"` → replace with `staticlibsportablearchiveForFiles` — same reason The two remaining `replace` actions (adding `riscv64` to `ARCH_DATA_MODEL=64` and inserting the riscv64 `debug_package %{nil}` block) still apply correctly and were left unchanged. ### Original error **Type:** `ActionNotAppliedError` ``` Traceback (most recent call last): File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/webserv.py", line 89, in debrand_packages result = apply_modifications( File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/debranding.py", line 136, in apply_modifications config.apply_actions(rpms_working_dir + f"/{package}") File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 938, in apply_actions action.execute(Path(package_path)) File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 475, in execute process_lines( File "/root/autopatch-tool/src/actions_handler.py", line 236, in process_lines raise ActionNotAppliedError( actions_handler.ActionNotAppliedError: Action 'ReplaceAction' was not applied successfully: No changes made for '['jreportablearchive -- %%{nil}']' in /root/autopatch-tool/src/autopatch-java-21-openjdk-6twj4hf1/rpms-namespace/java-21-openjdk/SPECS/java-21-openjdk.spec ``` --- Package: `java-21-openjdk` | Webhook branch: `c8`
eabdullin added 1 commit 2026-07-23 01:09:50 +00:00 
Removed four obsolete actions from config-portable-riscv64.yaml whose %%{nil} fix was already absorbed upstream.
eabdullin merged commit bc1e02508e into a8 2026-07-23 07:28:58 +00:00
eabdullin deleted branch agent-fix/a8-20260723-010949 2026-07-23 07:28:58 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
No items
No Label
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No Milestone
Assignees
Clear assignees
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: autopatch/java-21-openjdk#1
No description provided.
Delete Branch "agent-fix/a8-20260723-010949"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?