On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 02:13:56PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:50:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:42:49PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > "PJ" == Peter Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > PJ> That doesn't guarantee t
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 01:23:02PM -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
> > > > + chmod 755
> > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path}/$InstallName-$KernelVer
> > >
> > > There are systems with EFI32 and EFI64 out there, that aren't ia64,
> > > but that will likewise be dropping files into a
On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 11:36 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:16:00AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00:32PM -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
> > > Actually I came up with what I think is a cleaner fix for this. Since
> > > the default file permission on
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:16:00AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00:32PM -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
> > Actually I came up with what I think is a cleaner fix for this. Since
> > the default file permission on files on vfat are 755 anyway if the
> > kernel is mode 755 r
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00:32PM -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
> Actually I came up with what I think is a cleaner fix for this. Since
> the default file permission on files on vfat are 755 anyway if the
> kernel is mode 755 rpm doesn't complain.
>
> Anybody have thoughts on this specfile change?
