We use a weird version of rpm, which computes data size by subtracting next
offset from the current one, which yields 18 bytes and then MD5 check fails.
--
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-
That's a bug in your rpm, optimization that gets wrong results on exact data is
not a legit optimization.
We actually had the same bug although in slightly limited form, see #398 for
the discussion and fix.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email
Closed #1010.
--
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/1010#event-2950016749___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.r
pmatilai requested changes on this pull request.
As per above: this doesn't actually change the behavior at all, so NAK.
--
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/1
Sorry for dropping the ball here, seems obvious enough to me. Thanks for the
patch!
--
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/927#issuecomment-574569382__
Merged #927 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/927#event-2950049257___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint
Dusting off old PRs...
Has this gone into openSUSE by now, any experiences collected?
At any rate, you'll need to rebase this PR and get rid of the extra merge
commit in order to proceed.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https:
Closed #605.
--
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/605#event-2950093383___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.o
But then, we process backports in batches anyway so this is not going to be
merged via this PR anyway, closing.
Still, we need to come up with a way to earmark commits for inclusion in stable
releases, and a more open process for doing those stable updates in general.
--
You are receiving this
Oh my. The gcc people seem to be not too happy about this, but it's hard to fix
because the void cast is optimized away before the unused result check is done.
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25509
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
Anyway, fixed to something t
@mlschroe pushed 0 commits.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1009/files/9076d958bf91502eed454283d7daeafece4c6836..471e7d8bb26f0d7be877a261812b8dd8172650d3
_
Closed #1009.
--
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/1009#event-2950269608___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm
Reopened #1009.
--
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/1009#event-2950287205___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.r
Right, I hate these unsilenceable "we know better" warnings too, with a passion.
BTW thanks for the pointer, at least in the newer bug points out there's now a
"nodiscard" attribute that does the right thing for these cases. Guess we
should lobby glibc to adopt that instead of the obnoxious warn_
pmatilai approved this pull request.
This is quite a reasonable way to get around the dumb warning in general I
think.
--
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/10
Merged #1009 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/1009#event-2950342476___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
Closed #1008 via #1009.
--
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/1008#event-2950342480___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-mai
FYI: I had to revert the ndb glue change, as it caused segfaults if just an
index dbi got closed. The commit doesn't contain any information about the
problem it tries to solve, do you remember why your change was necessary?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
R
Hmm, the ndb glue change here looks decidedly wrong to me, the thing is
reference counted for a reason (guess this shows just how much attention I've
been paying to ndb changes, and I guess that needs to change from now on)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Re
Merged #891 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/891#event-2950529863___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint
Since there are no objections...
--
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/891#issuecomment-574627598___
Rpm-maint mailing
I have been writing an RPM generator
(https://rpm.org/user_doc/dependency_generators.html) and I can't understand
which output format it must have.
Script is here: https://abf.io/import/devel-rpm-generators/
It simply does not work, no provides/requires are generated, I have looked into
`pkgconf
Bad reading, bad patch. Sorry for the NULL pointer dereference. I'm not sure,
I might have mixed up somewhere with the different backends.
That said, the real problem could have been confusion about the code that calls
closeEnv(). It doesn't seem to make sense to test if `rdb->db_dbenv` is NU
I have found what was wrong ("NAME needs to be replaced by the name choosen for
the file attribute and needs to be the same as the file name of the macro file
itself").
But please document the input and output format. `pkgconfigdeps.sh` uses `echo
-n 'value '` and then `echo` an empty line, `fi
Maybe `echo -n ` is used to additionally print `= XXX`, then the output format
must be just line-by-line values?
--
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/1011#issu
25 matches
Mail list logo
