On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 12:06:19AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:18:40 +0200, Rudi Chiarito wrote: > > [mach] > > > > No. It's in fedora.us already in the "stable" repository (much to the > > > disliking of some people) and the fedora.us build system uses a modified > > > > What are these people's objections? Instability? The use of apt-rpm? > > Security? Anything else? > > Some issues collected here: http://tinyurl.com/2hbgy > > > My point is: get mach, rpmlint and equivalents into FC (not FE). > > rpmlint is not bullet-proof and reports several false positives and misses > many packaging mistakes. If it isn't customized--as the fedora.us rpmlint > is a bit (or also take a look at http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1788 > )--it is less helpful. http://people.redhat.com/laroche/ also contains an rpmlint with some changes for Fedora Core. rpmlint looks at many items that get less interesting to verify like the Group: given in a spec-file, but I welcome anyone cleaning this up and starting to improve the current version. I also heard the upstream maintainer would be very co-operative to add patches/changes. greetings, Florian La Roche
