On 04/27/2016 09:47 PM, Stefan Berger wrote: > "Rpm-maint" <rpm-maint-boun...@lists.rpm.org> wrote on 04/27/2016 > 05:50:54 AM: > > >> >> Well changing header size limit needs a bit more thought. The main >> problem is that packages with bigger header will look broken on older >> rpm versions and the usual way of dealing with this (adding rpmlib() >> Requires) won't work it needs reading the header. > > These huge headers are only occurring in a few very large packages and > only if one applies the per-file signatures. So most users probably > won't notice. > >> >> Also I wonder if we should increase the header size even more, to get >> rid of this topic for a longer time. I thought about 256MB which gives a >> 4 times increase over the 16MB. I am kinda tempted to go even further. >> Otoh the limit is there for a reason. And having rpm chew through one GB >> of broken data doesn't sound like a pleasant experience. > > Anything >=16 MB works with signed files for all packages in Fedora 23. > Let me know if you want me to resubmit the patch with a higher limit.
Yes, please. 256MB is probably the way to go. Let's hope we don't reach that any time soon. Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Paul Argiry, Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham, Michael O'Neill _______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint