Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192049 ------- Additional Comments From petersen@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-08-21 10:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #39) > > I suggest a bug be opened for that issue and that it block this bug. > > This bug will likely be driver dependent... Quite possible. Perhaps better would be to update the gnash source to cvs head? > Because it helps knowing that it is a source file associated with > the gnash rpm. Especially handy when you have a lot of patches and > source in SOURCES. Ok, you're right of course. It is so long that I've used the default directories for rpmbuilding, that I had quite forgotten about this namespace issue. (Personally I think it is much saner to build packages from separate directories...) > autoconf shouldn't require automake, since it doesn't require automake. (but autoreconf does) > In our case builrequires for autoconf is not that bad, it is just an > unneeded buildrequires, and the practice (and I think it is somewhere > in the guidelines) is to avoid buildrequires when there are allready > implied by another package. Not a blocker (other reviewers would consider > that a blocker, I think) I'll remove it anyway. Updated package: http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/gnash.spec http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/gnash-0.7.1-5.src.rpm For the record I don't really like the "flooding" of tmpdirs behaviour very much, but it seems like the simplest secure implementation possible. I guess X uses something similar for its /tmp/xses-$USER.XXXXXX session log files. A better implementation would probably save the .swf files in a directory like "/tmp/gnash-$USER/" owned by USER having permission 0700. It should also take account of TMPDIR I suppose. But I'm lazy... ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review