> So yeah, I'll note this here now for lack of better place.
>
> _I_ am overflowing with all these PR's to add a little check here and another
> on there. Time to take a step back and cool off a little. There clearly are
> various missing checks in the code but seems to me we're running in circl
I have one solution. `poptPrintUsage` is used in two places. Simply put after
each of that use `printModeSelectors` which will be a new function with
```
fprintf(fp, _("[-q] [--verify]\n"));
```
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly o
This is a bit more complicated than one would think. The `--query` option is
deliberately hidden from the usage/help output because there simply isn't a
good help section to house it:
```
$ rpm --help
[...]
Query/Verify package selection options:
Query/Verify file selection options:
Query option
Closed #1473.
--
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/1473#event-4371833918___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.r
And cc @s-t-e-v-e-n-k
--
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/1558#issuecomment-785094778___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-m
self.name in PathDistribution is a property in Python 3.10+ and thus we
can't redefine it as an instance variable. Instead we explicitly define
it as a property, which works on all supported Python versions.
cc @torsava
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://gi
So yeah, I'll note this here now for lack of better place.
*I* am overflowing with all these PR's to add a little check here and another
on there. Time to take a step back and cool off a little. There clearly are
various missing checks in the code but seems to me we're running in circles
puttin
Not sure if the earlier versions had those comments in dataLength(), if they
did then apologies for missing. Scratch them, otherwise we'll end up having a
comment on every other row of the code. A simple remark like "note use of 64bit
types to avoid overflow" before the function body is more tha
