On Wednesday 17 March 2004 07:44, Matthias Saou wrote: > Sam Varshavchik wrote : > > Mike A. Harris writes: > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > >>I have a dim recollection of an undocumented option to rpm (now > > >> rpmbuild) that's essentially equivalent to "-bb --short-circuit". > > >> That is, it jumps directly to binary RPM files creation; the > > >> installation buildroot is already assumed to exist and populated > > >> according to whatever's in %files. > > >> > > >>Anyone remember what it is? > > > > > > Unless this has changed since times past, there is no such > > > option. If I recall correctly, rpm very intentionally does not > > > allow you to skip over all stages and jump directly to the file > > > packaging stage which then writes out the final binary packages. > > > > Yeah and all that. This is a debugging/hacking option only. > > > > I managed to drudge my memory cell and remember the undocumented -bs > > option, which creates just the .src.rpm. Now, I need to remember the > > rest of the story___ > > Well, it's in both "--help" output and the rpmbuild man page, which is > pretty good exposure for an "undocumented option" ;-p The current set of options which can be "short-circuit"'ed are fine. However, from a security perspective, I would be very bothered by an easy method of creating binary rpms which could not be rebuilt by the source rpm. Yes, call me paranoid but I either use binary rpms from a source I consider to be "trusted" to some degree or I build them myself from a src rpm. This does not guarantee that someone couldn't slip something into a package but at least I have some source code to look at if things act strangely. -- Gene
