linux-kernel - Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dropped?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2c0942db0711260658j5ce017e7ucce4c373748ed7b7@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:58:23 -0800
From:	"Ray Lee" <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>
Cc:	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dropped?

On Nov 26, 2007 12:54 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@...shcourse.ca> wrote:
>   on current systems, "rpm" no longer has build capability and will
> fail thusly:
>
> rpm --target i386 -ta ../kernel-2.6.24rc3g2ffbb837dirty.tar.gz
> --target: unknown option
>
>   so it would make more sense to just require "rpmbuild" on the
> machine, would it not?

Only on current machines. You'd break building kernel RPMs on older
systems that don't have rpmbuild installed. So the change wouldn't fix
anything, and would break some non-zero number of setups that are
currently working, making the change a guaranteed net loss.

A patch that added version checks against rpm and whinged
appropriately about needing rpmbuild would likely be accepted, though.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/