On Thursday 06 November 2008, Debarshi Ray wrote: > >> Is it not better to do it in RPMLint with appropriate exceptions? > > > > Perhaps it would be a better option to separate this test from rpmlint > > (without stretching definitions of 'lint'). Payloading binaries isn't an > > RPM problem per se but more of a Packaging definition issue and, > > probably optional hence. > > RPMLint does check for strange file permissions within the tarballs > which are part of the SRPMs. eg., non-644 bits for a C/C++ files. Not really, IIRC. It just checks permissions of packaged files, and some source files in tarballs often propagate to -debuginfo packages with those "strange" permissions intact, and /that/ is something it'll warn about. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
