This might be a dumb question
>sizes are always 64bit ... RPMSIGTAG_LONGSIZE
If "header + payload" signatures are going away, is there any reason to
continue storing the combined "header + payload" size?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Quick note: "m" lines in the `sysusers.d` files could be used to create
Requires to the user and group.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2277#discussioncomment-5303187
You are receiving this because you are
This is a bug fix release addressing a number of regressions and other issues.
Highlights include:
* Preserve packages bit-by-bit when adding and then removing signatures
* Fix install of block and character special files
* Disable debuginfod server lookups during package builds
*
Hmm, I see and you are right. Well, I hope you can use
`__builtin_cpu_supports("x86-64-v3")` in the future once LLVM implements it.
It's very unfortunate we've added a useful builti-in, but projects are still
forced to parse cpuinfo itself :/
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on
Removing the code is not the issue. Don't rush it, thanks.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2423#issuecomment-1467654806
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Again, this is a facelift and not a redesign. V6 is more about clarfiying dark
corners and dropping obsolete, limited formats than adding anything new to
avoid scope explosion. So we're not planning to add support for any new payload
formats, just dropping the old 2GB limited payload format in
