This pull request **introduces 1 alert** when merging
ce5514692e86b1f556e96494882189405f8a5581 into
16d9074e1a3020f8844ed4a213fb92e844d8f9ad - [view on
LGTM.com](https://lgtm.com/projects/g/rpm-software-management/rpm/rev/pr-c82bc2501b0f2dd9d33aa330ec1e1449275633a3)
**new alerts:**
* 1 for
@KOLANICH pushed 1 commit.
ce5514692e86b1f556e96494882189405f8a5581 Improved python support: enums are
now enums with all additional goodies. Can usually be available using
CamelCased prefix, class members have the prefix stripped.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1311
-- Commit Summary --
* Added a high-level wrapper.
-- File Changes --
A python/rpm/highLevel.py (38)
-- Patch Links --
@ignatenkobrain commented on this pull request.
>AS_IF([test "$enable_zstd" = "yes"], [
if test "$have_zstd" = "no"; then
AC_MSG_ERROR([--enable-zstd specified, but not available])
fi
])
+ PKG_CHECK_MODULES([ZSTD], [libzstd], [have_zstd=yes], [have_zstd=no])
I think it
I guess it can't deal with the ECDSA and EdDSA signatures.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Double checking the code the unchanged files should not be counted when
`%_minimize_writes` is enabled. So it obviously isn't in this test case.
The question here is why the installation with `--ignoresize` passes without an
error. I wonder if there is some trickery going on on the FS level to
> My guess is you want that rpmbuild man page is more clear
Yes.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Thank you.
--
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/1310#issuecomment-656726988___
Rpm-maint mailing list
The ticket system is not a help forum. Please ask questions like this on
#rpm.org @freenode or on the mailing lists. See http://rpm.org/community.html
for details.
To the question at hand: There is an rpm.archive class. An instances can be
obtained from an rpm.files object with the .archive()
Closed #1310.
--
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/1310#event-3534208073___
Rpm-maint mailing list
As there now is a pull request (#1303) I am closing this ticket here. No need
to distribute the discussion to multiple places.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Closed #1300.
--
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/1300#event-3534156801___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Supporting signatures (being able to read and process them) and non breaking in
their presence, by just ignoring them, are very different things.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Sorry, I am not quite understanding what you are suggesting here. My guess is
you want that rpmbuild man page is more clear?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
--
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/1310___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
Looking at the code I understand why this may go wrong but I have not yet found
why it worked before and what changed.
`rpm --specfile` is translated to `rpmspec -q`with popt aliases. By default
rpmspec queries all generated sub packages. So I am kinda confused by you only
get one line. Can
Yes, this is a known - or not so well known - limitation. As the signature
check is basically done by hand it lack a lot of feature one would expect of
GPG proper.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> This change looks good and straight forward.
Thanks!
>
> I am missing some information on what version of zstd supports the new API -
> and if necessary a check in configure.ac.
Updated `configure.ac` (one needs at least release `1.3.8`).
--
You are receiving this because you are
Merged #1295 into master.
--
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/pull/1295#event-3534052702___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Let's hope that rpmlint is right...
--
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/pull/1295#issuecomment-656695500___
Rpm-maint
I don't see any need for further discussion here.
--
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/pull/1272#issuecomment-656689650___
Merged #1272 into master.
--
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/pull/1272#event-3534004891___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Thanks for the fix!
--
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/pull/1302#issuecomment-656686843___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Merged #1302 into master.
--
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/pull/1302#event-3533981732___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Looks straight forward to me.
--
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/pull/1308#issuecomment-656685900___
Rpm-maint mailing
Merged #1308 into master.
--
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/pull/1308#event-3533973211___
Rpm-maint mailing list
This change looks good and straight forward.
I am missing some information on what version of zstd supports the new API -
and if necessary a check in configure.ac.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
This pull request **introduces 1 alert** when merging
41310c6ffda99386b1e7f8354ebb542ffc310317 into
ae163b56468e5e83cbba192dab02ebdb9cf3df5d - [view on
LGTM.com](https://lgtm.com/projects/g/rpm-software-management/rpm/rev/pr-ada2169273c889f9f6fe1cafe2bcc19672203382)
**new alerts:**
* 1 for
Can usually be available using CamelCased prefix, class members have the prefix
stripped.
```python
import rpm
print(rpm.RPMBuild.CHECK | rpm.RPMBuild.CLEAN) # RPMBuild.CLEAN|CHECK:
24
print(rpm.RPMBuild(24)) # RPMBuild.CLEAN|CHECK: 24
```
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request
Looks good to me!
--
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/pull/1308#issuecomment-656673366___
Rpm-maint mailing list
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853597#c11
pkg_resources from setuptools 42+ no longer only use platform.python_version(),
but also platform.python_version_tuple() -- this was updated in packaging 19.1+.
This fix makes it work again with both new and old setuptools,
hopefully
@marxin pushed 1 commit.
1d965759205bf5f072724c397004ba1a433f7c7f Support threading for zstd
compression.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
@marxin pushed 1 commit.
fff307dd41294192560a33cca09e3675a0af925a Support threading for zstd
compression.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
My understanding of the feature is that it will eventually require some
mecanism to reconciliate the subpackage metadata (that the feature directly
targets in the new section) and srpm metadata.
Because without such a mechanism, you’ll be asking packagers to be extra
careful to never put
Is this contribution ever meant to modify the built source RPM content?
I.e. can `%postbuild` be (mis-)used so that `rpmbuild -ba` and `rpmbuild -br`
both generate a different variant of source RPM?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly
So the answer is that it's stable and reproducible.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
36 matches
Mail list logo
