pam src rpm replaced?

[Michael Schwendt]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 01:49:31 +0200, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:

> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_activity.cgi?id=101563
> 
>  I noticed the adding of this bug to 100644, but it's just the actual 
> maintainer hasn't reacted to it.

Would that change a thing? No. Just imagine the maintainer wastes a
few seconds on a "will be fixed in next release" comment, but then
forgets to fix it actually. ;) Missing buildreqs run at very low
priority unless a src.rpm breaks in Red Hat's own build environment.
The maintainer will [hopefully] add a comment or close the report when
the bug is fixed in the spec file actually.

> > Maybe flex is an essential component in Red Hat's build
> > environment?
> 
>  If that were so some package my current setup should require it.

Wrong assumption. gcc-c++/make/gettext, for instance, are no package
build requirements either. So, basically every C++ application would
not build with your setup. But of course, you have installed those
packages deliberately. Or because they belong to the development
group.

> > There are
> > other packages with incomplete build requirements which fail to build in a
> > clean environment.
> 
>  Can you name a few?

Sorry, no space left in my brain for such a list. Occasionally you
stumble upon such packages, provided that your build environment is
really pretty close to "clean" (with regard to -devel packages and
lots of tools). And Red Hat seem to have had no problems building
those packages, because their build environment is different from
"just rpm-build and dependencies".

- -- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/SBnL0iMVcrivHFQRAudNAJ0ZMIuo34xERK267WEVm7HeX1eLwgCcDFIe
GF7pmvidwp4IWezPhCXrQRI=
=Sowk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----