[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150112002356.GA4821@openwall.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:23:56 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: db-5.3.28 (in rpm package)
Galaxy,
Trying to verify db-5.3.28.tar.xz, I compare it against the upstream
file mentioned in the comment in rpm.spec (thanks!) and I see these
additions and changes:
db-5.3.28/dist/Makefile.in | 3
db-5.3.28/dist/aclocal.m4 |only
db-5.3.28/dist/aclocal/libtool.m4 |10503 +++++++++--------------
db-5.3.28/dist/aclocal/noop.m4 |only
db-5.3.28/dist/autom4te.cache |only
db-5.3.28/dist/config.hin | 21
db-5.3.28/dist/config.hin~ |only
db-5.3.28/dist/configure | 1484 +--
db-5.3.28/test/tcl/include.tcl | 30
This makes verification tricky/unreliable. Would it be reasonable to
avoid such changes (merely remove some files, not add/change anything)?
I suppose you could be making the minor changes and running autotools
from our spec file, so those changes would be subject to our revision
control. Also, note how in nmap.spec I describe exactly which files are
removed - you could do the same in rpm.spec to make it easier and more
reliable to reproduce the same changes for future upstream versions.
Alexander
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.
