Hi @pmatilai, from a golang code, i can use a C code. But i'm trying to
understand how to query the database from the rpmlib C API.
For example, i read this documentation: [ftp.rpm looks like official but too
old and i failed to read for whish version it is
valuable](http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/s
Commit d99186f2ef6fc0dfaaefe599a98492a84fd18940 failed to update the popt alias
to the new macro. So --key-id with gpg continued to work but not with sq - just
goes to so what you don't test is broken by definition.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github
@dmnks approved this pull request.
Other than the note above, looks good to me.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3408#pullrequestreview-2413023639
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message
Oh, thanks for spotting, I'll fix it up.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3408#issuecomment-2454681833
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
(gah, sure is Monday when you need so many fixups to messages etc for a patch
this small)
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3423#issuecomment-2454361476
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Mes
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
004c9201bdaf7b92cea52c4a9291292c887938a8 Fix rpmsign --key-id with Sequoia
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3423/files/3fff6d45e7c085c93666b50b475acce75e410615..004c9201bdaf7b92cea52c4a9291292c887938a8
You are receiving this be
I'm trying to learn something but it is a lot of time consumed for nothing as
long as official manual online are wrong or missing crucial information (as
whish version the manual is usable with).
I'm asking for RedHat company to provide an updated manual about how to use
there C API and remove e
Hi @mlschroe! Thanks for your answer.
So how could I migrate the old db data to the new rpm version but still be able
to modify the migrated data by updating/installing/deleting packages with the
the new rpm version?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rp
Only output filenames on addsign/delsign success on verbose mode, no news is
good news. Previusly we emitted non-sensical messages like this:
/some/path/my-1.rpm:
/some/path/my-2.rpm:
...presumably in anticipation of error messages, but it's saner to have
error messages carry the path whe
The first commit seems to have forgotten to update the `doExpandMacros()` call
in `rpmExpandMacros()` where it still passes a C string (despite the function
expecting a C++ string reference instead). The call is later refactored in a
followup commit in this PR but maybe it should still be fixed
We removed support for BerkeleyDB in rpm 4.17.0, so your new rpm does not see
the old database.
There's still a way to read old databases if you add the `--enable-bdb-ro`
option to the `autogen.sh` call. But the new rpm cannot modify the database.
The idea is that you use `rpm --rebuilddb` to
@ffesti commented on this pull request.
> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ struct rpmlogCtx_s {
unsigned mask;
int nrecsPri[RPMLOG_NPRIS];
std::vector recs;
+std::map, int>> seen;
Yeah, I thought about using an unordered map in the beginning and then opted to
go for the normal map just in
@ffesti pushed 2 commits.
d0b48668e20fd1e60a70f770bd804a88d1a7fafd Add rpmlogOnce() and rpmlogReset()
6be14bd24eb29087c5d82b370a12988af4c057a2 Use rpmlogOnce() in handleHdrVS
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3417/files/7b3377bb0c2bff99a06c5dd4d3aa7ef560
@pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ struct rpmlogCtx_s {
unsigned mask;
int nrecsPri[RPMLOG_NPRIS];
std::vector recs;
+std::map, int>> seen;
Oh, interesting. It didn't really even occur to me that you'd need to define a
hash for it when map didn't r
@pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ struct rpmlogCtx_s {
unsigned mask;
int nrecsPri[RPMLOG_NPRIS];
std::vector recs;
+std::map, int>> seen;
Another note is that it's good to document such things in the commit message:
map worked out of the box, uno
Merged #3417 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3417#event-15100079278
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mail
Closed #3395 as completed via 547ba089313be46861fe1f5b21fbe887205697c2.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3395#event-15100079526
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
__
Closed #3395 as completed via #3417.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3395#event-15100079624
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
R
Closed #3336 as completed via #3417.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3336#event-15100079529
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
R
Oh and FWIW, there will be other changes to the messages coming through #3385.
Those changes are best discussed in that ticket, I just think this is obvious
enough not to require prior discussion.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/
Folks wanting to discuss pros and cons of detached signatures are welcome to do
so in the [relevant
topic](https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2789) but is
off-topic here, and has now been flagged such. This ticket is about a new form
of embedded signatures in rpm 6.0. T
What about "Header"?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3426#issuecomment-2456444289
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Header (and Payload) only appear as the first word on the line where upper case
seems appropriate.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3426#issuecomment-2456446131
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thr
The signature and key related messages are a historical mess of inconsistency,
we have at least the following in closely related messages that happen under
slightly different circumstances:
- Header V4 RSA/SHA256 Signature
- RSA signature: NOTFOUND
- signatures OK
- key ID
- Key Fingerprint
Just
Loosely related to the multiple signatures stuff - this was driving me crazy
when writing tests.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3426#issuecomment-2456399807
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this threa
(also, all the Signature/signature case differences while "digest"
was consistently "digest")
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3426#issuecomment-2456403611
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
@pmatilai It's interesting to know all this history. Thank you for this time
dedicated to the RedHat culture that explains things.
Would it be humanly conceivable to dare to ask that the old online manual can
indicate to which version of librpm it refers, but also to use the same time
possibly t
> The call is later refactored in a followup commit
Ehm, I take that back, it's not fixed in the latest commit either, it still
passes on a C string :sweat_smile:
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3408#issuecomment-2454
Right, I initially thought it was something else.
This isn't a problem at all, C++ will merrily construct temporary string
objects in a case like this. The other direction wont work though :sweat_smile:
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-mana
Ack, I wondered if that was the case, thanks :smile:
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3408#issuecomment-2454705932
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Merged #3408 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/3408#event-15103936793
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint mail
31 matches
Mail list logo
