Let's say you didn't notice this, and you extend a flat module file (with only one type of module) by adding a second type of module. Here's a simple example, where a working common-fonts.yml with just the fonts module has an rpm-ostree module added to it like so:
Note: the module fails to complete. I only noticed because I didn't actually test this on a new system until 2 weeks later, and none of the fonts I'm used to being present were there.
Expected behavior
Build should fail -- the module failed to run, in this case the fonts failed to install.
Test environment
BlueBuild GitHub Action (not reproduced locally). See link in "Current behavior" section
Example recipe
Here are the module recipes used in the "Current Behavior" section:
Background
The current documentation about
recipe.yml
files does explain clearly that amodules
key is required when you have more than one moduletype
in the same file.Let's say you didn't notice this, and you extend a flat module file (with only one type of module) by adding a second type of module. Here's a simple example, where a working
common-fonts.yml
with just thefonts
module has anrpm-ostree
module added to it like so:What happens?
Current behavior
In a real-life example with a very similar change: The build succeeds, despite a "duplicate type" error being logged (link should open at line # of error log).
Note: the module fails to complete. I only noticed because I didn't actually test this on a new system until 2 weeks later, and none of the fonts I'm used to being present were there.
Expected behavior
Build should fail -- the module failed to run, in this case the fonts failed to install.
Test environment
BlueBuild GitHub Action (not reproduced locally). See link in "Current behavior" section
Example recipe
Here are the module recipes used in the "Current Behavior" section: