Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492609 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-06 15:16:48 EDT --- I understand why you need to generate the checksums after rpm is done poling at the binaries; I was just confused by the language in use: This overrides the default which was in place at least from Red Hat Linux 9 through Fedora 11's development cycle. which (to me, at least) sort of sounds like it's overriding some sort of default checksum generation. Not that's it's in any way material, but perhaps it will explain my confusion. Anyway, I guess it's not reasonable to run the test suite unless you somehow compile a specal version that doesn't check its checksums. I guess it would be nice if the executables had some way to skip the verification, but absent that the test suite isn't useful. Finally, the issue of where to put the checksums. Given the problems with the alternatives, %{_libdir} seems fine, rpmlint's complaint about it nonwithstanding. I guess that covers everything. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review