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

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...>
Cc: Ray Lee <ray-lk@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 9:37 am

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:


i know that that's the case *now*, but we're considering the
possibility that someone is using an older system on which "rpm" is
*still* the builder.  in the end, all i'm suggesting is that the build
should work under all possible scenarios.

rday

p.s.  i'm not *trying* to make this issue more obfuscated or
convoluted than it has to be -- i am merely succeeding.

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dropped?, Robert P. J. Day, (Mon Nov 26, 4:54 am)
Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dro..., Robert P. J. Day, (Mon Nov 26, 11:53 am)
Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dro..., Robert P. J. Day, (Mon Nov 26, 12:13 pm)
Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dro..., Robert P. J. Day, (Tue Nov 27, 9:37 am)
Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dro..., Robert P. J. Day, (Mon Nov 26, 11:08 am)
Re: can support for "rpm"-based package building just be dro..., Robert P. J. Day, (Mon Nov 26, 11:12 am)