[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: snort ?

Daniel Wittenberg wrote :

> No, but it seems to make more sense if we can come up with one, so there
> are dozens of copies of snort RPM's out floating around.  I know of at
> least 3 different ones right now that all run on FC3.  So if you have
> changes you'd like to see, how about sending them to me and I'll look at
> pushing them into the official RPM's ?  I personally don't see what's
> wrong with specifying which DB you want to compile for, most people in
> the past have liked the fact they didn't have to install all the
> libraries for both just to recompile the SRPM.  I mean if most of it
> ends up getting ripped out then it probably will mean a spec
> specifically for FC3, which will be different than from what you get
> from snort.org, which I don't like, but that's the way opensource goes I
> guess.

I understand what you mean, and how you feel, but "A spec specifically for
FC3, different from what you get from upstream" is what RH/FC has always
been, and Fedora Extras will be no different. I do hope to see upstream
included spec files and Extras spec files become identical or at least
similar for packages that will be maintained by an upstream developer ;-)


Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 3 (Heidelberg) - Linux kernel 2.6.10-1.760_FC3
Load : 0.25 0.12 0.10

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]