[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 14:59:24 +0400
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: massive Owl userland updates
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 12:18:20PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 12:04:40PM +0400, (GalaxyMaster) wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:41:01AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> > > BTW, did you preserve our changes to RPM, such as package build time
> > > comparison (in case Version and Release on a package being upgraded
> > > remain unchanged between the old and the new revision)?
> >
> > You are underestimating me :). Yes, all our custom patches are
> > incorporated. :) However, after reviewing your patches to RPM I
> > strongly believe that our build time comparison is a no-op patch :).
> > The reason for this is that we have ldv@'s (?) SHA1 header comparison
> > and if a package has been rebuilt its header changes (even if the
> > version stays exactly the same). Anyway, my goal was to update
> > autotools and RPM and preserve as much as possible (behaviour-like),
> > so I kept all patches in.
>
> IIRC, both of these checks are by ldv@, and I vaguely recall discussing
> that redundancy.
Originally it was a single patch, later split into two parts.
The digest comparison patch was merged upstream (see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=134388),
but then there was a fork, and it looks like rpm.org missed this patch
because they forked too early.
The build time comparison patch was never submitted.
This build time comparison patch still does something useful:
it allows "rpmi -F" to update rebuilt packages without changing their NEVR,
the same way it allows "rpmi -U" to be used without --force for that kind
of updates.
That is, you'd better keep both patches applied. :)
--
ldv
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
