Re: python nosignatures/digests in rpm 4.4.1?

[Matthew Miller <mattdm mattdm org>]

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:18:10PM -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> > > >And it appears that the flag I want is simply
> > > >rpm._RPMVSF_NOPAYLOAD. (And it
> > > >can be set only the once.)
> > > Add --stats to see what time various operations take. If NOPAYLOAD is
> > > affecting,
> > > then you have *lots* of packages with old header+payload signatures.
> > I was testing on the Fedora Core 3 updates area -- does that count as "old"?
> No, packages produced by rpm-4.0.4 or earlier count as "old".
> Hmmm, actually are most of the packages you are checking not signed?

They are all signed by Red Hat / Fedora keys, which _aren't_ imported on
this system.

> I'm trying to understand why NEEDPAYLOAD has any effect whatsoever.
> NEEDPAYLOAD prevents verifying header+payload digest or signature,
> leaves the file descriptor positioned at beginning of payload, ready for
> unpacking.
> The flag was never intended for the purpose that you are using it for.

Or that Seth is using it for. :)


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm mattdm org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>