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@xxxxxxxxxx <http://mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
