Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Moving unnecessary notice about empty rpm packages to debug message. (#615)
> You can get the list of files with rpm -q --qf='[%{FILENAMES}\n]'. There is
> nothing dirty about that, those are the building blocks.
So, for what `rpm -ql` ?
And, as example same behaviour of `ls` (Why you have OWN WAY and why this
solution right?):
```Bash
$ mkdir empty_dir
$ cd empty_dir/
$ ls
$ echo $?
0
```
--
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/615#issuecomment-449495684___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Moving unnecessary notice about empty rpm packages to debug message. (#615)
> I don't see that this is the rpm binary's issue I completely disagree with this imprisonment. You (or your team ) made strange, unpopular decision that makes problems for simple (popular, expected) case. Other software put this warning to stderr or just return nothing with success code. You forced developers to produce hardcode that forces bugs with different behaviors in environments. Software shouldn't force you to write bad code. -- 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/615#issuecomment-449480485___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
