[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120820135341.GA22392@debian>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 17:53:41 +0400
From: Aleksey Cherepanov <aleksey.4erepanov@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Aleksey's daily status report #13
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:42:02AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> Aleksey, Frank -
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 03:14:51AM +0400, Aleksey Cherepanov wrote:
> > For two days...
> >
> > Done
> >
> > - .debs are finished
> > - .rpms are finished
> > Ugh... %-)
>
> This would be good if it were true
It is true ;-)
> , but from what you wrote below you're
> merely repackaging previously built binaries. Frank - did you approve
> this sort of thing (and I missed it)?
>
> Do the resulting packages have proper dependencies on the libraries?
> For example, what happens when you try to install them on a system
> without Qt installed?
Everything is ok.
My checklist was:
- dependencies (needs qt and john, and does not need anything else)
- permissions, uid, gud on installed files
- place of license file
Previously I tested binaries separately looking for:
- problems with appearance
- path to john and its auto detection
- need of qt installation, its version and so on
My .debs and .rpms are good.
Though .rpm dependency on qt does not insist on certain version (just
4.*). So there could be problems with qt older than 4.6. But among
tested systems I did not see such.
Thanks!
--
Regards,
Aleksey Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
