* Panu Matilainen <pmati...@laiskiainen.org> [Mar 04. 2011 08:34]: > On 03/04/2011 09:12 AM, Klaus Kaempf wrote: > > > >This still might not be sufficient to make the package non-ambiguous, > >as there's no guarantee that this is really firefox. > > You mean as in "somebody might have made a package named firefox but > it's not coming from the vendor"?
Exactly. The name could be anything, the content (verified by the signature) crucial. > > > >How about making the log line configurable with a format string ? > > > >Something similar to date(1), with the possibility to add additional > >package indentifiers like vendor, signature, etc. > > Sure its possible and even easy technically to make it configurable, > it could be just a header query format string basically. OTOH if > it's configurable it makes it harder to have a parser for the log > messages as you dont know what format it might be in. You're right, thats a problem. Its probably sufficient to limit the configuration options for the logging to 'simple' (just the operation + NEVRA) and 'extended' (operation, nevra, signature, ...), both with a defined format. > > Also if talking about enterprise scenarios, you'd probably want to > have any scriptlet failures etc logged too. > Yes, definitely. Any rpm operation which affects the system should be logged. Klaus --- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) _______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
