-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 360
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
sb in lhs and rhs #3185
Labels
Comments
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 4, 2024
This requires adjusting a number of test that reflect the ordering. The changes in tests/rpmsigdig.at look straight forward and correct - just changing the order in which the signatures and checksums are presented. The changes in tests/rpmi.at seem to drop the relevant information. This might be accidental as the code just returns the first issue found. But "no signature" seems kinda weird result when before it complaint about a specific signature. May be someone with more clue about this should ahve a second look beforemergin. Tags: DONT Resolves: rpm-software-management#3185
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 18, 2024
This requires adjusting a number of test that reflect the ordering. The changes in tests/rpmsigdig.at look straight forward and correct - just changing the order in which the signatures and checksums are presented. The changes in tests/rpmi.at seem to drop the relevant information. This might be accidental as the code just returns the first issue found. But "no signature" seems kinda weird result when before it complaint about a specific signature. The next patch tries to fix that. Resolves: rpm-software-management#3185
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 18, 2024
Don't rely on the fist issue found being the most meaningful. The selection could still be smarter but at least it won't report a missing signature when actually one is broken. Related: rpm-software-management#3185
OK, turn out we have an older ticket for this also: #1057 |
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 23, 2024
Don't rely on the fist issue found being the most meaningfuli. Always return 1 to loop through all signatures / hashes. Use the first error of the highest rc number. The selection could still be smarter but at least it won't report a missing signature when actually one is broken. Related: rpm-software-management#3185
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 26, 2024
Don't rely on the fist issue found being the most meaningful. Always return 1 to loop through all signatures / hashes. Use the first error of the highest severity. Using the severity in vd->type[] is a bit of a hack but OK as it is only checked for == RPMRC_OK (aka 0) in verifyPackageFiles. Related: rpm-software-management#3185
ffesti
added a commit
to ffesti/rpm
that referenced
this issue
Jul 26, 2024
Don't rely on the fist issue found being the most meaningful. Always return 1 to loop through all signatures / hashes. Use the first error of the highest severity. Using the severity in vd->type[] is a bit of a hack but OK as it is only checked for == RPMRC_OK (aka 0) in verifyPackageFiles. Related: rpm-software-management#3185
Closing as duplicate of #1057 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
rpm/lib/rpmvs.c
Line 443 in c00d8a0
rpm/lib/rpmvs.c
Line 445 in c00d8a0
both operands are sb
I guess it should be like
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: