Use new RPMTAG_MODULARITYLABEL to identify modular RPMs

[goosemania]

Old RPMTAG_DISTTAG is still in the code for the old content
that might be still around.

closes #4869
https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4869

[dralley]

Never mind

[dralley]

This looks correct to me. Can I easily test this?

[goosemania]

Upload a modular rpm into Pulp and look at this content, its is_modular attribute should be set to True

[bherrin3]

@dralley @goosemania I will be using the following fixture location. Mind seeing if the modular RPM I stole from Fedora works?

This will later be updated to a generated fixture, but will suffice for initial verification.

If this RPM is not is_modular, please provide one so I have a sane test baseline.

Thanks!

Edit: https://repos.fedorapeople.org/pulp/pulp/fixtures/rpm-with-modular/

[bherrin3]

@dralley @goosemania The PR for this test in Pulp-2-Tests is available to use.

If that is used and verified good, we can knock out two PR-birds with one PR-verification.

I would appreciate knowing it if works with the new updates as well ;)

PR Branch with Test

pulp/Pulp-2-Tests#201

[dralley]

@goosemania @pulp/qe I tested this manually and it works for me, but unfortunately I destroyed by vagrant box literally seconds before I saw this comment.

[dralley]

@goosemania I ran the QE provided test for uploading an RPM and it failed. The sync test passed, but it passed prior to applying the patch also. It uses a different RPM.

The RPM comes from here: https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/fixtures/rpm-with-modular/

I looked at the RPM headers with this command I got from the internet.

rpm -qp nodejs-10.15.2-1.module_f30+3181+3be24b3a.x86_64.rpm --qf "$(rpm --querytags | sed -nr 's/(.*)/\1:%{\1}/p' | tr '[:space:]' '\n')"

and it gave

MODULARITYLABEL:nodejs:10:3020190301191749:a5b0195c

so the tag is definitely there but maybe it doesn't match the regex

[goosemania]

@dralley, @bherrin3 , if modularitylabel is set, there is no check for regex, regex is for old tag.
I'll take a look later today.

[goosemania]

@dralley , @bherrin3, I re-tested manually and I ran the test provided in pulp/Pulp-2-Tests#201 - it succeeded.

[dralley]

Confirmed that the failure was an environment problem.