> The two AT_XFAIL_IF macro tests are problematic because they try to test
> behavior that is actually undefined, and so there is no particular output
> that _is_ expected.
I think there should be a specific output of `--eval. '%undefine xxx'.` , it
should be `..`. Now the output is `. `, which may mislead the user to
understand the logic of `--eval. '%undefine xxx'.`.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2240#issuecomment-1299441724
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2240/c1299441...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
