On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I recommend PIAF because you can see it from the source
>level without having to deal with crappy RPM's
If the rpms are poorly written (in their .spec file, one
assumes), why not amend them; Writing a good .spec file is
reasonably trivial.
see:
http://wiki.centos.org/PackageManagement/Rpm
or use mine; if you have a problem with their form, and it is
a well formed objection, I'll glady improve them. Just send a
private email.
ftp://ftp.owlriver.com/pub/mirror/ORC/asterisk/
This set is a bit old in the ersions [I'll update at some
point], but has worked here forom omnths without so much as a
quiver.
.... of course you may have issues with the RPM packaging
system; I can see how using the sources, so you cannot ask a
package database when a new exploit comes along, to see if you
are vulnerable, might be prefered, as it offers the
opportunity to wade through sources and versions over and over
again. Job security, so to speak. RPM managed sysadmin is
boring. ;)
-- Russ herrold
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
