You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Uploading an RPM file with an epoch greater than 0 causes the upload to make a mal-formed rpm entry.
Looking through the database it appears that the [package_version].version entries have the epoch prefixed in the version erroneously and the [package_file].name also has the epoch prefixed before the version number.
Manually fixing these entries in the database fixes the expected URL that dnf needs to download the package, but since the file name was changed the signature is invalid.
This only affects the functionality within dnf - the packages within the listing in gitea will still allow manual downloading of the file.
Steps to reproduce:
Get docker-ce rpm (tested version was 3:28.0.2-1.el9 -- filename docker-ce-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm)
Attempt to upload the rpm to a repository
Notice that:
Version number has been changed from 28.0.2-1.el9 to 3-28.0.2-1.el9
File name has been changed from docker-ce-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm => docker-ce-3-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm
Description
Uploading an RPM file with an
epoch
greater than0
causes the upload to make a mal-formed rpm entry.Looking through the database it appears that the
[package_version].version
entries have theepoch
prefixed in the version erroneously and the[package_file].name
also has theepoch
prefixed before the version number.Manually fixing these entries in the database fixes the expected URL that
dnf
needs to download the package, but since the file name was changed the signature is invalid.This only affects the functionality within
dnf
- the packages within the listing ingitea
will still allow manual downloading of the file.Steps to reproduce:
docker-ce
rpm (tested version was3:28.0.2-1.el9
-- filenamedocker-ce-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm
)28.0.2-1.el9
to3-28.0.2-1.el9
docker-ce-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm
=>docker-ce-3-28.0.2-1.el9.x86_64.rpm
Gitea Version
1.23.3
Can you reproduce the bug on the Gitea demo site?
Yes
Log Gist
No response
Screenshots
No response
Git Version
No response
Operating System
RHEL9
How are you running Gitea?
Using the 1.23.3 release from
go-gitea
releases.Replicated using
demo.gitea.com
Database
MSSQL
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: