@pmatilai converted this issue into discussion #2751.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2750#event-10896805830
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
@pmatilai approved this pull request.
Just FWIW, looks fine to me.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744#pullrequestreview-1719573460
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Closed #2092 as completed via #2743.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2092#event-10896681726
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Merged #2743 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2743#event-10896681561
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
@pmatilai approved this pull request.
If you say so, but I find the notion of the host affecting something inside the
Dockerfile (or vice versa) more than just a little mind-bending :flushed:
On a related note, possible alternatives include just bumping the CI to F39 now
that it's out, or
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2750
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
Thanks for the patch.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749#issuecomment-1801222918
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint
Merged #2749 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749#event-10896589512
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
And that prevents you from reporting bugs? If so, the security world is even
sadder place than I thought.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2211#discussioncomment-7506935
You are receiving this because you are
@pmatilai I, and I suspect @rhdesmond as well, are not comfortable creating a
situation where a bug is not a security vulnerability in RPM, but is a security
vulnerability in the downstream project.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Nothing defines RPMHOME, replace it with RPM_CONFIGDIR.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2749
-- Commit Summary --
* Fix a macro in the comment
-- File Changes --
M macros.in (2)
-- Patch Links --
@dmnks pushed 1 commit.
53f4c37f115d9fcfa42ebfdd03590dfcd35e33b6 Adapt Dockerfile.fedora to F39
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2748/files/732d057cbd966fa21fd3908c54a177813a279d77..53f4c37f115d9fcfa42ebfdd03590dfcd35e33b6
You are receiving this because
The fedora-repos-modular package is gone from F39. This commit makes the
Dockerfile work on a F39 host with the mktree.oci backend since we override the
release with podman build --from fedora:39 ... there.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
Thanks for the detailed discussion all!
@DemiMarie is correct; I understand @pmatilai's concerns about intended use and
security impact. For now, we parse the db files (as other open source scanners
do) as creating a runtime is prohibitively expensive as pointed out above.
Appreciate the
Based on a separate discussion, cec4d24 isn't needed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744#issuecomment-1798732554
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
@dmnks pushed 1 commit.
34d36430b5f757f2b632d6c0959864e9efd6cd47 Add GitHub Actions workflow file for
test-suite
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2744/files/9680f8a9f426439559d2e3da38ab42b6328864c2..34d36430b5f757f2b632d6c0959864e9efd6cd47
You are
This indeed looks like a dupe of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936422 which #1684 was attempting
to fix. The actual, real transaction (assuming that a `%pretrans` scriptlet
removing the old symlink is present) does the right thing, this is just about
the *test* transaction
Yes, this issue is still present on master, the associated logic hasn't been
changed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1458#issuecomment-1798450397
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Yep, rpm has no means to track content moving around except through symlinks.
I can see how it would be useful of course, but it'd require somehow recording
such transformations in the package, and teaching the rest of rpm to honor
those.
Just a wild idea: perhaps file moving could be encoded
We should support all the same features for a file list entry here, which also
means being able to handle regular expressions.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2655#issuecomment-1798345651
You are receiving this because
@pmatilai converted this issue into discussion #2747.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1199#event-10885554422
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
As per the original posting, this actually belongs in discussions. And separate
tickets for each split-off piece.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1199#issuecomment-1798328458
You are receiving this because you are
Running file classification early has another potential beneficiary in #2207.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1224#issuecomment-1798309986
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Another interesting possibility would be hooking brp scripts to file
attributes. This would require running the classifier much earlier, on the
entire buildroot rather than per-package basis as it is now.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Much of the __spec* template stuff simply has never been implemented.
It's not rare for that era of rpm development, various apparent future plans
have been written down like this (including public headers) but never actually
wired to the code.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on
I believe this is now fixed with #2181, closing.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219#issuecomment-1798271272
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Closed #1219 as completed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219#event-10885140277
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
This remains a design bug, basically, and should eventually be addressed one
way or the other.
One of the practical, not-incompatible things we could do is provide a way for
Python to access the raw header data, whereas it currently is hardwired to
always use extensions.
--
Reply to this
The `%doc` directive is just syntactic sugar for:
1. Install the given file in the build directory into the build root
2. Specify its absolute path in `%files`
Now, `%doc` and `%license` are "special" files (as @ignatenkobrain noted) which
are only processed *after* the normal file entries,
The problem is of course far wider than just this one error message. To solve
this, we need to refactor all spec-error reporting to a variable argument
helper function which can then report filename, line number and such
consistently though rpmlog().
--
Reply to this email directly or view it
Closed #2294 as completed via #2723.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2294#event-10883272403
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Merged #2723 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2723#event-10883272168
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
Okay, this has hung around long enough now.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2723#issuecomment-1798004671
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Merged #2746 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2746#event-10883260238
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
Merged #2745 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2745#event-10883257925
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
Closed #2741 as completed via a8ec768950f0adb9fb0c264596350fc929437ac8.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2741#event-10883258358
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
36 matches
Mail list logo
