-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 thus Dag Wieers spake: > On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote: > >> thus R P Herrold spake: >>>> Fetch the desired duplicity source code from >>>> https://code.launchpad.net/duplicity/, unpack it and change >>>> in its directory. There, just issue >>>> >>>> + {{{ >>>> - python setup.py install >>>> + python setup.py install}}} >>> I see the above fragment in the draft newsletter, and frankly >>> am disappointed at proposed content not using the packaging >>> system. It is clearly not a 'best practice'. The item in >>> question will run as root, and one assumes will over time be >>> updated and have security fixes. >>> >>> In a CentOS publication, we should not be proposing installing >>> time bombs that a later admin 'cannot see'. We are all that >>> later admin as time packages and we forget the details of a >>> particular installation >> I absolutely agree with you; my 'plan' was to write it that way (in the >> draft), and -- if my spare time allows -- build an appropriate RPM and >> maybe even get it integrated in one of the repos. Then, I could modify >> it to the 'decent way'. >> >> As backup plan, I could just continue and use the not up-to-date >> rpmforge package. > > Or provide a SPEC file for a duplicity update in RPMforge. It's not that > hard, I will try to do so ASAP, however my backlog is quite impressive ATM... > but don't expect someone else to do it for you... OK. Cheers, Timo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFLz/2Tfg746kcGBOwRAnUWAJ9lGqs44XVtDMDwUgSQ7F0Lc7W8egCeMQGN nQocSX5ZZxGFjsQh+/WEFGs= =1lNI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
