VNFSDK generates wrong report from validation process

When the user run all rules for selected csar then vnfsdk validation application generates an invalid report.

One failed rule has an impact on other rules. But if we run rules separately, one by one, then its ok.

In example below, rule r130206 fails, and this rule status was used to mark rules r146092, r293901, r787965, r972082 as invalid. But this is not true. The Rules are valid and no errors were reported for these rules.

{ "passed":false,
"vnfreqName":"r130206",
"description":"The VNF/PNF package shall contain a Digest (a.k.a. hash) for each of the components of the VNF package.\nThe table of hashes is included in the manifest file, which is signed with the VNF provider private key.\nIn addition, the VNF provider shall include a signing certificate that includes the VNF provider public key,\nfollowing a pre-defined naming convention and located either at the root of the archive or in a predefined location (e.g. directory).\n",
"errors":[

{ "vnfreqNo":"R130206", "code":"0x4001", "message":"Unable to find cert file defined by ETSI-Entry-Certificate!", "lineNumber":-1 }

,

{ "vnfreqNo":"R130206", "code":"0x4002", "message":"Unable to find CMS section in manifest!", "lineNumber":-1 }

,

{ "vnfreqNo":"R130206", "code":"0x4007", "message":"File has invalid CMS signature!", "lineNumber":-1 }

]

},

{ "passed":false, "vnfreqName":"r146092", "description":"The VNF/PNF package Manifest file MUST contain: non-mano artifact set with following ONAP public tag\n-onap_ansible_playbooks\n-onap_others\n-onap_pm_dictionary\n-onap_pnf_sw_information\n-onap_scripts\n-onap_ves_events\n-onap_yang_modules\n", "errors":[ ] }

,

{ "passed":false, "vnfreqName":"r293901", "description":"For a VNF/PNF package CSAR MUST contains a TOSCA-Metadata directory with the TOSCA.meta metadata file.\nThe TOSCA.meta metadata file MUST includes block_0 with the Entry-Definitions keyword pointing to a TOSCA definitions\nYAML file.\nAdditional keyname extension must be included as following:\n-ETSI-Entry-Manifest\n-ETSI-Entry-Change-Log\n", "errors":[ ] }

,

{ "passed":false, "vnfreqName":"r787965", "description":"If the VNF or PNF CSAR Package utilizes Option 2 for package security, then the complete CSAR file MUST be digitally signed with the VNF or PNF provider private key. The VNF or PNF provider delivers one zip file consisting of the CSAR file, a signature file and a certificate file that includes the VNF or PNF provider public key. The certificate may also be included in the signature container, if the signature format allows that. The VNF or PNF provider creates a zip file consisting of the CSAR file with .csar extension, signature and certificate files. The signature and certificate files must be siblings of the CSAR file with extensions .cms and .cert respectively.\n", "errors":[ ] }

,

{ "passed":false, "vnfreqName":"r972082", "description":"The PNF software information file is included in the package and it MUST be compliant to:\n - The file extension which contains the PNF software version must be .yaml\n - The PNF software version information must be specified as following:\n onap_pnf_sw_information:\n - pnf_software_version: \"\u003cversion\u003e\"\n", "errors":[ ] }

Commit https://gerrit.onap.org/r/c/vnfsdk/validation/+/105832 has introduced mentioned bug.