Yup, a ternary operator for macro conditionals would be really handy. No strong
opinion on the separator character. Other than noting how unfortunate it is
that rpm used a syntax that is incompatible with the rest of the world :(
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this
Closed #162.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/162#event-970314515___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Yes. It's also been already fixed in both git master (commit
bde88ada3a0fbd17f9b5db9fb5426eb0f1ff5efd) and the just released rpm 4.13.0.1
(http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.13.0.1).
Thanks for the report though :)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
There should be a way to verify the payload before trying to uncompress, and
more importantly, unpack it:
- We have digests on the contents of individual files, but detecting corruption
in middle of installation, after all sorts of scripts might have already run,
is no good at all
-
I tend to agree with @ignatenkobrain, no processes should be left around once
build completes.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Thinking about it a bit more, there are many other challenges with the multiple
intermediate digest snapshots: the compression stream is created on
file-by-file basis which isn't well suited for this purpose, as one file might
be just a few bytes and the next one gigabytes, we'd presumably want
