SPECS: rpm.spec - 5.1.6 - updated TODO (will glob patch finally go away?)

Jeff Johnson n3npq at mac.com
Tue Oct 28 23:31:27 CET 2008


On Oct 28, 2008, at 6:24 PM, Jan Rekorajski wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 28 of October 2008, baggins wrote:
>>> Author: baggins                      Date: Tue Oct 28 22:11:56  
>>> 2008 GMT
>>> Module: SPECS                         Tag: HEAD
>>> ---- Log message:
>>> - 5.1.6
>>
>>
>>> - updated TODO (will glob patch finally go away?)
>>
>> Only if current upstream rpm is smart enough to always use own glob()
>> implementation (which differently handles symlinks pointing to  
>> nowhere than
>> current glibc implementation).
>
> rpm's glob() has been moved from misc to rpmio, and I don't know how  
> to
> test if it works properly :(
>

If you find glob tests, I'll wire into rpm's "make check".

Otherwise, glob() failure is usually not quiet. De facto
testing using rpmbuild is more than sufficient.

The reason for the glob patch (which ultimately has led
to rpm internalizing glob) had to do
with dangling symlinks.

If you can package a dangling symlink, then the internal
rpmio glob is likely as good as glibc's (upon which its based).

>> http://rpm5.org/cvs/tktview?tn=38&_submit=Show really got fixed?
>
> I don't think so. The only that got fixed was
> http://rpm5.org/cvs/tktview?tn=39&_submit=Show
>
> I just removed duplicate URLs in spec.
>
> BTW Why aren't we using rpm 5.1.x in Th?
>

rpm-5.0 changed the rules for memory allocation. The older rule
was replaced with
	All memory return'ed from headerGet() must be free'd.

Reworking the changed malloc rule into poldek is likely the rate
limiting flaw.

But rpm-4.4.9 (and rpm-4.5 and ..) are all pretty similar in usefully
used functionality.

73 de Jeff


More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list