Closed #1614.
--
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/1614#event-4572854542___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Well, the page says "Draft" for a reason. 4.17.0-alpha is not tagged because it
is not out yet. All actual releases are tagged in the git repository. Note that
we did not always do alpha releases in the past. RPM is such a central
component of the distribution that we don't really expect people
> rpmPubkeyDig() is a public API function, we can't just drop it.
How many (important) API dependencies we have? What if I do the corresponding
patch for libdnf as well?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Reopened #1617.
--
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/1617#event-4573459838___
Rpm-maint mailing list
> I reverted e838c48 because the regression it fixed is no longer an issue, and
> it makes life a little more complicated for auditors.
NAK!
That thing has been messed with more than enough, and I've asked you to leave
it alone many times now.
--
You are receiving this because you are
@DemiMarie 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/1617/files/bb1a9658bfd45fac52878d53cd1b5abc8569fa39..d1cc512a9c315c56c90c891c5052d3ebfca6b602
Closed #1617.
--
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/1617#event-4573459405___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.
--
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/1626#pullrequestreview-632736247___
@Conan-Kudo approved this pull request.
--
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/1627#pullrequestreview-632735996___
Such packets are probably an attempt to exploit a bug in RPM, rather
than being useful.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1627
-- Commit Summary --
* Reject extra packets after a signature
-- File Changes --
@Conan-Kudo @dmach
--
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/1612#issuecomment-816892019___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@DemiMarie pushed 2 commits.
0b3aa0a682951ee90a2e89c9bca91181c7cb0b43 Simplify OpenSSL crypto code
3a334f025056555e846ca52354950e1693bd155f Avoid double frees if
EVP_PKEY_assign_RSA fails
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Merged #1624 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/1624#event-4573869635___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Closed #1616 via #1624.
--
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/1616#event-4573869641___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Merged #1625 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/1625#event-4574061767___
Rpm-maint mailing list
It's not a question of any individual user. Removing interfaces from public API
requires a soname bump and those are not something to be done lightly because
they cause pain to every single rpm (API) user. So it's not something you'd do
for any *one* interface. What we *can* do is mark stuff
Anyway, 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/1625#issuecomment-816634070___
Rpm-maint mailing
While I like the overall idea of adding type hints to the binding I am not a
big fan of the content of python/rpm/_rpm.pyi. This basically duplicates the
API implementation in the C based API and is very easy to get out of sync.
Having this generated automatically during build time from the C
So we'd have --checksig and --verifysig which are confusingly overlapping in
both name and functionality, verifysig being not "more secure" just different.
I don't think so.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Closed #1588.
--
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/1588#event-4574142108___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Closed #1581.
--
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/1581#event-4573897135___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Did you see my question in the last comment above?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
This is undefined behavior. Pinging @dmach @Conan-Kudo.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1626
-- Commit Summary --
* Avoid out-of-bounds pointer arithmetic in dataLength()
-- File Changes --
M
It looks like some of the tests are failing on this?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@DemiMarie pushed 1 commit.
a668ee79e97ca2ec8c2432be4f63c303d82f1c0d Avoid out-of-bounds pointer
arithmetic in dataLength()
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Not sure why test 346 failed, but I re-pushed it with just the bare minimal
change.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
26 matches
Mail list logo
