>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> writes: VS> -1 to any buildroot suggestion that doesn't propose implementing VS> it internally in rpm aiming for eventual deprecation and VS> elimination of the BuildRoot tag (and related "rm -rf"'s) in VS> specfiles. I have to agree. We've been through this once already (painfully, at that) and I don't really see the point of doing it again unless we make real progress in getting this buildroot nonsense out of the specfiles and into rpm. One issue with the security argument made in the proposal is that, while a laudable goal, the actual exposure isn't due to the buildroot specification in Fedora packages, since we could fix all of those and there would still be exposure when someone rebuilds packages that don't come from Fedora. The exposure is in the rpmbuild infrastructure itself, and honestly I think that it would be more productive if the security arguments were directed there. - J< -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
