On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 13:44 -0400, Aumick Avram wrote: > I did what you suggested. What I found was at the time of a particular > .a file with the same name for each rpm, the header of the file was > different. > > On the original ver 0, I found the followinging: > !<arch> > / 1058431359 0 0 0 10912 ` > > > On the next ver I found the following: > / 1100207510 0 0 0 10912 ` > > The other versions were similar except, for what I have determined, is > the epoch date field. Since as far as I know the library was not > recompiled and linked in since none of its library routines changed, the > rpm should have only added the library as is without changing the date > field. Since I am not the one who packaged the rpm, I am not sure of the > process. I was just told that the library file was added in as is > without any change. > > Any other thoughts? > It was probably the striping process that RPM automatically does to binaries and libraries during the packaging that changed your header. Dax Kelson Guru Labs
