> > we're phasing those out in favor of documenting how to use rpmbuild -bp on > > the .src.rpm; it's a bit silly to ship the same stuff twice really... > > Hm, at least in the past these two were not precisely the same > although the bulk, clearly, was identical. In ...<arch>.rpm there > were various bits-and-pieces build specific - like versioned > symbols. that is not the case for any of the 2.6 rpms I did since the early days and in FC2. > So from POV of an end-user this is not that benign change as it > looks in the first glance and we hear all the time "disk space is > cheap" when complaining about some bulk monsters. From some > postings it looks like that this change will spell serious trouble > even for some participants of this list. in FC2 you ALREADY cannot use kernel-sourcecode for building modules against so the change is a lot smaller than you make it out to be.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part