On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:35:51PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 20:55 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:53:15PM +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> > > Therefore: either let us fix this issue completely ('mkdir
> > > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'), perhaps with reducing functionality in some use cases
> > > (e.g. %_tmpdir/%username/%name-... buildroot).
> >
> > Make no mistake: I'm all for doing so, we even voted yesterday, but
> > the vote didn't went well.
> I voted against it, because
> a) all this is playing with symptoms. The real cause is inside of rpm
> and therefore should be fixed inside of rpm.
That's as helpful as "The real cause of buffer overflows is that C
doesn't handle them, so we should stop fixing them until #C++ double-O
fixes them."
> b) this is all is not a real issue in practice.
Well, you need to pick a side. On odd days in the calendar you require
corner-case buildroot setup that allows mulitple users to builde
xactly the same package with the same evr. On even days the same users
will take a vow to never mess with each other's buildroots.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpxXpmppwe4E.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
