While its possible to open special files, they are, well, special and have
side-effects also known as, ahem, semantics. Opening a device file
in Unix means accessing that *device*, and FIFOs have their own semantics. In
other words, for rpms purposes, we should never EVER open these files as a
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
9af893b243d1e419c140f3aa40ff52dfb30a2f72 Use fd-based ops for metadata in
FA_TOUCH mode too, when possible
--
View it on GitHub:
That would break the macro for anybody using it outside the build scriptlets,
which is an entirely legit thing to do. You'll need to fix those specs instead.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2343#issuecomment-1381471213
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
89d4247b50bfd0b499701b7a244bbf696885fb3b Never follow links in path-based
chown()
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2349/files/ea584e98c6826856a639eaab99d7aebd47c095bd..89d4247b50bfd0b499701b7a244bbf696885fb3b
You are
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
ed2657577b62de9557e07efe0907096e10b5fe09 Add a test for special device node
installation
--
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2349/files/89d4247b50bfd0b499701b7a244bbf696885fb3b..ed2657577b62de9557e07efe0907096e10b5fe09
You are
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
3c7a0fc218e9885f666e78cb5d13dc191f645d0c Use our O_DIRECTORY equivalent when
opening files for setmeta
--
View it on GitHub:
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
17a2683910e0589bb58c408bf1505522665fdfdd Explicitly specify O_RDONLY when
opening files for setmeta
--
View it on GitHub:
By all means.
My gut feeling says a function will find more users, but if an additional
shortcut syntax in expressions seems useful then why not. But that's from
somebody who never felt the need to do globs in macros/expressions, so YMMV...
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on
Merged #2349 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2349#event-8219858561
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
Closed #2195 as completed via #2349.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2195#event-8219858728
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
I just had a use case where I needed glob matching in an rpm expression. Is
that something we should add?
We could define a new operator like `"string" ~~ "glob"` or hijack an existing
one that currently throws an error like `"string" * "glob"`. Of course we can
also use a function like
...plus a whole pile of assorted tweaks and fixes to the surrounding code. Took
me a year of recovery and rehab to get back to this :laughing:
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2349#issuecomment-1381511483
You are
@pmatilai pushed 3 commits.
d8688c2bdf205a065fb79a2fae52342014000784 Add a test for special device node
installation
a30b8321ba17be7f432a3ef8bff3246ba435a42a Explicitly specify O_RDONLY when
opening files for setmeta
4d10dc044766441dec6d0f60ef8d1eca01a01708 Use our O_DIRECTORY equivalent
Hmm, was supposed to be closed automatically by
28c92fd54c93371c3062664d8a938438a2be88d6 but apparently GH doesn't process
"Fixes: a, b, c" style lists.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2275#issuecomment-1381757394
You
Closed #2275 as completed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2275#event-8220186545
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint
I have a number of RPMs that work fine on Fedora 37, but fail to validate on
Rawhide and ELN with `package tag 268: invalid OpenPGP signature`:
```
# rpm -qip fb-genchefserverlist-20230113-032842.x86_64.rpm
error: fb-genchefserverlist-20230113-032842.x86_64.rpm: Header RSA signature:
BAD
Put up a minimal package that repros the issue at
http://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/fb-test-opengpg-20230113-083251.x86_64.rpm
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2351#issuecomment-1382122274
You are receiving this because
The signature for those interested:
```
-BEGIN PGP ARMORED FILE-
wsBcBAABCAAQBQJjwYhxCRAREg9HFOVtyAAA9lAIAEB7pOPwvCex4hzyGq/nDmcn
sm38Ad/cVvUeUwgsM3zzsd4Ft1VBboy0gpldAYx0kwX4Cj2qI/KMpQ6R2DLirhD9
M0G8l9whgX7pMZwnXNqB398eMsphMH2yKInpLoXFTuTffYK9u9ZYc6M9RGXyXZk0
I extracted the signature and looked at it:
```
$ sq packet dump --hex /tmp/blob.pgp
Unknown or Unsupported Packet, new CTB, 3 header bytes + 284 bytes
Tag: Signature Packet
Error: Malformed MPI: leading bit is not set: expected bit 8 to be set in
100 (40)
c2
> What implementation are you using to sign the rpm?
It's an internal implementation (that from what I can tell uses gpg under the
hood, but I need to double check). I will followup with the engineers that
developed it and see what we can find out. Thanks for the quick reply!
--
Reply to this
Thanks!
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2351#issuecomment-1382232836
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ___
Rpm-maint mailing list
This issue might be related:
https://github.com/community/community/discussions/27607
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2351#issuecomment-1382254196
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
22 matches
Mail list logo
