> But is not true for rpm version 4.14
4.14 fell out of upstream "support" something like three years ago, it's not
really relevant at all. Distros have their own realities of course, that's just
how it goes.
Not that it hurt anything to add the version to `-` support in the docs, we
usually d
> ... at least implicitly documented via the parametric macro declaration
> syntax, that only short option names are supported by rpm itself.
This could be formulated even more clearly.
> Passing `-` as the option string delegates _all_ option processing to the
> macro (as per
> https://rpm-
> Passing `-` as the option string delegates _all_ option processing to the
> macro (as per
> https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/macros.html),
This is not true for rpm version 4.14 (which is the default on Leap) as
mentioned in the first report, it simply outputs
> $ rpm --d
Closed #2541 as completed.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2541#event-9500626147
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
___
Rpm-maint ma
I think it's quite well known, and at least implicitly documented via the
parametric macro declaration syntax, that only short option names are supported
by rpm itself. Passing `-` as the option string delegates *all* option
processing to the macro (as per
https://rpm-software-management.github
With actual rpm releases (Leap: 4.14, Tumbleweed 4:18) it is not possible to
parse options in the form `--` or `-- arg` as shown below:
```
$ rpm --version
RPM version 4.14.3
$ LC_ALL=C rpm --define '%foo(-) "%**"' --eval '%foo --test file1'
foo: invalid option -- '-'
error: Unknown option - in f
