On Nov 26, 2009, at 9:41 AM, Matthew Dawkins wrote:

>
> But look at what the original bug report says. Shouldn't the missing  
> sources also show up in the errors if that is the correct logic?

I did (and have) looked.

The bug report states either ... or ... as a preference and the
context pretty clearly says the expectation is
	No error message is desired.

Meanwhile that's @rpm.org's issue, not mine.

You have stated a behavior, and added a URL and have yet
to state what your expectations is.

Which goes around and around and around. The --specfile
(and --specsrpm) options are perhaps the highest maintenance
implementations in rpmbuild, wired in perl bindings and URPMI, and  
mostly
_NOT_ what rpmbuild or --query was intended for.

73 de Jeff