Il 02/Apr/2015 18:43 "Jeffrey Johnson" <n3...@me.com> ha scritto: > > > On Apr 2, 2015, at 12:11 PM, devzero2000 wrote: > >> >> Il 02/Apr/2015 17:39 "Jeffrey Johnson" <n3...@me.com> ha scritto: >> > >> > Um ... was there actually a problem being solved here? >> > >> > Some of these scripts (like rpm2cpio.sh) are vitally >> > important and have been posted publicly like here >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18787375/how-do-i-extract-the-contents-of-an-rpm/25986787#25986787 >> > and integrated into other projects. The syntax change is >> > highly intrusive to using diff to see what has changed. >> > >> > *shrug* Many of these scripts haven't been used in years. >> >> Ciao jbj >> >> The aim is to modernize a little these shells. The comment should be clear. The change is trivial, but a further check is certainly necessary ( some incompatibility is possible ) . > > > Please describe "modernize" a bit.
Here a possible interpretation http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/082 > I certainly know several useful (but thankless) changes needed with the scriptie in rpm: > > 1) standardize/regularize on "foodeps -P|-R" instead of ancient/hoary foo-prov/foo-req > > 2) resurrect v_pkg to fully automate and simplify the provides/verify of a non-rpm vendor OS > > 3) write shell/perl to verify the MD5 sum of header+payload without rpm installed (like rpm2cpio.sh) Ok. Todo. It was just a way to start again , maybe not so useful . Free to Revert. No.problem. Best regards > > hth > > 73 de Jeff >
