What should we do with this package ? It has been almost two weeks since Lapo posted it and there isn't a single comment. Is it ok to be uploaded ?
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Ready at the same usual address: > http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.5-2.tar.bz2 > http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.5-2-src.tar.bz2 > > Revision changelog: > 1 Compiled with gcc version 3.2 20020818 (prerelease) > 2 Included Anthony Heading's patch to avoid dead child processes > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01155.html > 3 build script updated to support digital signatures > 4 source package now contains original's package detached gpg signature > by the author and detached signatures on the script itself and on the > patch, signed by me > 5 signatures can be checked with "./rsync-2.5.5-2.sh checksig" > 6 "./rsync-2.5.5-2.sh all" can still be used to create an unsigned > package (with only original rsync package signature) > 7 "SIG=1 ./rsync-2.5.5-2.sh all" can still be used to create a > signed package (with only original rsync package signature AND > signatures on script and patch) > > 1 and 2 lead me to suggest a "test" period for the package > 3 is just a nifty feature I liked adding, but it is intended to be > optional, that's why I have not changed the "normal" build command and > it correctly checks (and warns) for missing /usr/bin/gnupg an the such > > I would like a negative or positive comment on the "improved" script, too =) > > -- > Lapo 'Raist' Luchini > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) > http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796) >