fix: skip filling in empty fields in APK metadata #1484
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Nirusu
force-pushed
the
fix/apk-empty-d-p
branch
7 times, most recently
from
b5aa735 to
80b773b
Compare
kzantow
approved these changes
Jan 19, 2023
Signed-off-by: Nils Hanke <[email protected]>
wagoodman
force-pushed
the
fix/apk-empty-d-p
branch
from
80b773b to
8c16d26
Compare
|
note: force pushed to rebase on main (fixes the CLI test failure) |
wagoodman
added
bug
GijsCalis
pushed a commit
to GijsCalis/syft
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2024
Signed-off-by: Nils Hanke <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Nils Hanke <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Attempt to fix #1483. This should skip empty fields in the definition, leaving the Dependencies and Provides slices empty.
Added a test for it.
The debug log message might be a bit noisy, so not sure whether to keep it? It also lacks the package name when printing. However, since the package name is parsed from another field in the same context, I didn't want to rely on it.
Feedback and suggestions appreciated!