@dmnks , FA_PLUGIN and FA_CUSTOM have effectively the same problem as previous
versions of this patch had with RPMRC_PLUGIN_CONTENTS: there could be multiple
plugins wanting to claim it, whereas there can only ever be exactly one thing
to create a file. See
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2057#discussioncomment-5046976
for some background.
On one level allowing a plugin to make rpm reflink a file instead of unpacking
one seems like a fairly reasonable thing actually, but trying to fit this into
rpm does seem like cramming a square peg through a round hole kind of thing.
Which basically tells you the rpm API isn't right for the job, because it was
never planned to handle such a task. Which is of course what we're discussing
here, but the "seems to be two different things" issue from my earlier comment
is nagging at me more and more.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2416#issuecomment-1596680739
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2416/c1596680...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
