@pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -133,16 +133,32 @@ int rpmKeyringModify(rpmKeyring keyring, rpmPubkey key,
> rpmKeyringModifyMode mod
if (item->second->fp == key->fp)
break;
}
- if (item != range.second && mode == RPMKEYRING_DELETE) {
+ if (item != range.second && (mode == RPMKEYRING_DELETE || mode ==
RPMKEYRING_REPLACE)) {
+ /* remove sub keys */
+ for (auto it = keyring->keys.begin(); it != keyring->keys.end();) {
+ if (it->second->primarykey == item->second) {
+ rpmPubkeyFree(it->second);
+ it = keyring->keys.erase(it);
+ } else {
+ ++it;
Don't use a for-loop when you mess with the "counter" from inside, I'm not sure
that's defined behavior at all. And even if the compiler handles it, the reader
wont expect it. A while-loop alarts the reader to some manual loop management
ahead, see eg freeArgs() in macros.c
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3403#pullrequestreview-2392414793
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3403/review/2392414...@github.com>_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
