On Feb 12, 2008 5:51 PM, Brad Hinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You caught me. I agree, it is much better to patch it correctly. But > at ~2500 lines, the bacula spec file is a beast to edit, and I thought > that would scare off any newcomers to rpmbuild. :)
And rpm-wise, would a separate package like mtx not be built (and fixed) separately with bacula having a dependency on it? That way it needs to be patched only once rather than for each package that may include it... Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
