On Oct 7, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:59:44PM +0200, draenog wrote:
>> +--- lib/rpmfc.c.orig 2014-10-07 15:53:03.185631053 +0100
>> ++++ lib/rpmfc.c 2014-10-07 16:02:32.487591097 +0100
>> +@@ -593,7 +593,7 @@
>> +
>> + { "Desktop Entry", RPMFC_DESKTOP_FILE|RPMFC_INCLUDE },
>> +
>> +- { "perl script text", RPMFC_PERL|RPMFC_INCLUDE },
>> ++ { "Perl script", RPMFC_PERL|RPMFC_INCLUDE },
>> + { "Perl5 module source text", RPMFC_PERL|RPMFC_MODULE|RPMFC_INCLUDE },
>> +
>> + { "PHP script text", RPMFC_PHP|RPMFC_INCLUDE },
>
> I think it depends on file/magic version.
Yes.
> IMO it's better to include both strings.
>
If you want to control for content in *.rpm tags, a private magic file
just for rpm is needed.
Dialects of magic strings magic should not be compiled into RPM,
that will never succeed.
hth
73 de Jeff
_______________________________________________
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
