On Sat, Jan 02, 1999 at 01:28:08AM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > No that's a great idea. Have rpm spawn an external -_possibly_tampered_with_- > binary to verify qmail. That's just silly. Do an md5 checksum of the verification binary as a preamble to verifying the qmail binaries. > Then having a control file with the uids in it sounds safer to me. That's just flat out not an option. Until it is, why waste time considering it? -- John White [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Public Key: http://www.triceratops.com/john/public-key.pgp
- qmail <-> rpm integration question johnjohn
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration question johnjohn
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration question Peter C. Norton
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration question Peter van Dijk
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration quest... johnjohn
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration ... Peter C. Norton
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration ... Peter van Dijk
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration quest... Peter C. Norton
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration ... Adam D. McKenna
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration question johnjohn
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration question Russ Allbery
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration quest... johnjohn
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration ... Russ Allbery
- Re: qmail <-> rpm integration ... Peter C. Norton
