[WBEL-devel] Re: openssl security update needed
Jamey Fletcher
jamey@odin.library.beau.org
Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:20:34 -0600 (CST)
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Joe Little wrote:
> seeing that RHEL doesn't support anything below i586, and targets
> packages for i686, I would have just used that target.
And there are issues John's discovered, and others have pointed out, why
packages should in general be built for i686, with only a very few
exceptions being built *specifically* for i586. In fact, I *think* you're
supposed to even built *those* in some weird mode that does a "i686
*except* for those funky instructions that don't exist on a i586" - some
memory monitoring registers, I think.
> Second, one should now have to build out those directories. The
> rpm-build package handles that for you.
> Finally, you can edit the .spec file to change organization, distro,
> etc. before building...
Not the official word here, not that there really *is* one, but I think
most users might have concerns if the package says "WhiteBox" as the
distro, but isn't signed with the WhiteBox key... We need to be able to
say, I think "Built For WhiteBox Linux", to differentiate those parts that
come as part of RHEL/WBEL. Remember John's guiding principle - WhiteBox
*is* RHEL, as close as legally possible. Just as FreshRPMs, Dag, and the
rest don't claim their packages are *part* of the distro, just that
they're *built* on or with that distro in mind.
Speaking of, I need to find and offer out the LTModem driver module John
got built for me.
--
Jamey
----<--<@
jamey@beau.lib.la.us