| |
@@ -90,8 +90,9 @@
|
| |
second_module_build = models.ModuleBuild.query.filter_by(id=3).one()
|
| |
if changed_component:
|
| |
mmd = second_module_build.mmd()
|
| |
- mmd.get_rpm_components()['tangerine'].set_ref(
|
| |
- '00ea1da4192a2030f9ae023de3b3143ed647bbab')
|
| |
+ components = mmd.get_rpm_components()
|
| |
+ components['tangerine'].set_ref('00ea1da4192a2030f9ae023de3b3143ed647bbab')
|
| |
+ mmd.set_rpm_components(components)
|
| |
second_module_build.modulemd = mmd.dumps()
|
| |
second_module_changed_component = models.ComponentBuild.query.filter_by(
|
| |
package=changed_component, module_id=3).one()
|
| |
@@ -204,7 +205,9 @@
|
| |
mmd = second_module_build.mmd()
|
| |
br_list = Modulemd.SimpleSet()
|
| |
br_list.add('master')
|
| |
- mmd.get_dependencies()[0].set_buildrequires({'some_module': br_list})
|
| |
+ deps = mmd.get_dependencies()
|
| |
+ deps[0].set_buildrequires({'some_module': br_list})
|
| |
+ mmd.set_dependencies(deps)
|
| |
xmd = glib.from_variant_dict(mmd.get_xmd())
|
| |
xmd['mbs']['buildrequires'] = {
|
| |
'some_module': {
|
| |
@@ -306,9 +309,11 @@
|
| |
mmd = Modulemd.Module().new_from_file(
|
| |
path.join(BASE_DIR, '..', 'staged_data', 'testmodule.yaml'))
|
| |
mmd.upgrade()
|
| |
+ components = mmd.get_rpm_components()
|
| |
# Modify the component branches so we can identify them later on
|
| |
- mmd.get_rpm_components()['perl-Tangerine'].set_ref('f28')
|
| |
- mmd.get_rpm_components()['tangerine'].set_ref('f27')
|
| |
+ components['perl-Tangerine'].set_ref('f28')
|
| |
+ components['tangerine'].set_ref('f27')
|
| |
+ mmd.set_rpm_components(components)
|
| |
module_build_service.utils.format_mmd(mmd, scmurl)
|
| |
|
| |
# Make sure that original refs are not changed.
|
| |
MBS has been using the libmodulemd API incorrectly by assuming that methods like
get_rpm_components
return the actual object in memory and not a copy. This has been true but wasn't something sgallagh intended. We found this out after he had me test his new version of libmodulemd. This PR removes those assumptions.@sgallagh could you please review?