On Jun 21, 2008, at 1:52 PM, devzero2000 wrote:
(aside) It is time for LSB RPM SPEC to move to RPM4 packaging format
Indeed. That is the raison d'etre for [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I have not
pursued
because of zero (yes zero!) interest from vendor's or LSB.
Not my problem. I will do a IETF
On Jun 21, 2008, at 12:48 PM, Denis Washington wrote:
My current interest in your code is disaster prevention, not
otherwise.
I welcome any motive if it improves code quality, so thanks
anyway. ;)
NP. My life is hell when rpmdb's get hosed up. Doesn't matter whether
its a kernel
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:38 PM, Denis Washington wrote:
Sound like a plan? My primary goals here are two-fold:
1) avoiding disasters if bogus headers start to be added to an rpmdb.
2) exposing rpmdbAdd() (and rpmdbRemove()) methods for use by
LSB/ISV/whatever applications that wish to
On May 20, 2010, at 5:03 AM, Dominique Dumont wrote:
On Thursday 20 May 2010 10:03:55 Denis Washington wrote:
How does that sound?
A bit like some ideas I have regarding packaging for ISV ;-) :
http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2010/UniversalPackageForIsv
I proposed this for Google
