[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Unsafe symlinks lead to missing files (Issue #3284)

See https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-54386 for details This need examination to check whether this affects newer versions, too. rpm in RHEL 8 has a modern version of the fsm. So it is possible that this is an general issue. It could also be an unfortunate interaction between the new fsm co

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Non-root owned symlink causes install failure (Issue #3283)

This is a continuation of #3100. Unsafe symlinks are detected during installation and create a failure. This is the right thing to do in case we encounter such things at this phase. But we really need to check for this in advance during the transaction check and not even start the transaction if

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document using Sequoia for signing (Issue #3248)

Yeah comments to commits are a bit of a black hole, better to use the GH review thing (don't be shy, you're absolutely welcome to do that, even for minor suggestions :smile: ) -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3248#issuec

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document using Sequoia for signing (Issue #3248)

I added a few comments to [the commit](https://github.com/pmatilai/rpm/commit/7e29b2101ae73d09eefbe93d0b019e57c6cbbdb5). I don't know why they aren't showing up here. In short, they are just a few minor suggestions. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Document using Sequoia for signing (Issue #3248)

Ended up with much more than just documentation because ... it felt like if we document the above in rpm, we'll be stuck with the bad _gpg_fu names forever. Comments on naming etc totally welcome, I'm not particularly extatic about the new macro names in the PR, its just something to avoid getti

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support signing with Sequoia through a simple macro switch (PR #3282)

@pmatilai pushed 1 commit. 7e29b2101ae73d09eefbe93d0b019e57c6cbbdb5 Support signing with Sequoia through a simple macro switch -- View it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3282/files/f9c3ef03685eae22230b3116549a89d871f07294..7e29b2101ae73d09eefbe93d0b019e57c6cbbdb5

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Support signing with Sequoia through a simple macro switch (PR #3282)

Add new %_openpgp_sign macro to select between implementations, currently "gpg" for GnuPG and "sq" for Sequoia are supported. Also introduced is a new macro for specifying the signing key in the configuration: %_openpgp_signer. Whereas GnuPG allows arbitrary string match to be used for key sele

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] 264: rpmsign --addsign FAILED (rpmsigdig.at:461) (Issue #3277)

> Out of curiosity: what gpg version is this? I've never seen such behavior > from it in the tests. [root@localhost SPECS]# gpg --version gpg (GnuPG) 2.4.3 libgcrypt 1.10.2-unknown Copyright (C) 2023 g10 Code GmbH License GNU GPL-3.0-or-later This is free softw