snort ?

[Daniel Wittenberg]

> Not repeating my previous replies, though. Most important, a default
> "rpmbuild --rebuild snort-2.3.0-0.fdr.1.src.rpm" creates a single package,
> no MySQL support, no Postgresql support, and so on. This doesn't look like
> intended. 

Still not clear on this, when I rebuild it I get the one RPM with no DB
support. ?

> Ugly things I would really like to see removed: the conditional
> cruft for Fedora 

I completely agree with this, and never liked the naming scheme for the
official Fedora RPM's anyway.

> and cAos specific sections (commented on that before) and
> vendor/packager tag mangling, 

I didn't personally add the cAos build info, and still not sure what's
wrong with having it there, doesn't hurt anything unless you explicitly
build for it.  Like having the oracle build info, it's there if you want
it (and some people have used it, make their life easier), but doesn't
hurt anything normally.

> well as the silly buildroot=/ checks
> which add no safety (emptying the buildroot anywhere else than at the
> start of %install makes a poor and confusing spec design).

Some of this was legacy for broken RPM setups that wouldn't do these
checks, and were almost always added in response to things getting
hosed.  I agree that we've come along ways in the last year with RPM
building that most of this stuff shouldn't happen anymore and can be
cleaned up.

Dan