On 07/03/2014 03:15 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> For example, when using the default URL path rpkg attempts to
> download the following file:
> The path I wish to set for rpkg to use is:
ewww, seriously eww. the tooling would need to rename the file it gets
to the name in the spec file. this I think doesn't belong in rpkg,
yes, so rather than using a curl -O, you get to give it a name to write
to - a name that maps to sanity in the source repos, and does the sha
validation without needing to waste time doing it down the road, and a
process that allows far better and more effecient duplication checks on
the cache side.
tell me why we'd want to change to lose all that functionality ? I'm
getting assurance on code retreval to match code checkin, for free.
whatever tooling centos people come up with will have to replace
function with its own version. I would strongly advocate for centos to
rethink how they are doing it and follow the standard convention.
'standard convention'... which is exactly what ?
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc