Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:35:52 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <>
Subject: Re: Aleksey's daily status report #13

On 08/20/2012 07:42 AM, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 03:14:51AM +0400, Aleksey Cherepanov wrote:
>> For two days...
>> Done
>> - .debs are finished
>> - .rpms are finished
>>   Ugh... %-)
> This would be good if it were true, but from what you wrote below you're
> merely repackaging previously built binaries.  Frank - did you approve
> this sort of thing (and I missed it)?

I didn't actually approve anything, nor did I disapprove.

> Do the resulting packages have proper dependencies on the libraries?
> For example, what happens when you try to install them on a system
> without Qt installed?

I also thought about dependencies, but:
While qt development packages (for building johnny) where not part of
the default fedora installation, qt was already installed, probably due
to a lot of other packages depending on it.
I agree that the packages should provide proper dependencies (which
might be hard because each distribution seems to name the required
packages differently), but in practice I doubt that any GUI user will
have a problem with missing packages.


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.