Re: Packaging Guidelines: Why so lax for BuildRoot?

[Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at>]

Stephen Warren <s-t-rhbugzilla <at> wwwdotorg.org> writes:
> I'm curious why the packaging guidelines aren't more specific re: the
> requirements for the BuildRoot tag.

Because there were endless fights over which of the 3 BuildRoots now listed is 
the right one, so they ended up just allowing all 3 as a compromise to stop the 
fights. By the way, the first one (the mktemp) is listed as preferred, but the 
second one is actually the one used by almost all packages (partly for 
historical reasons, it used to be the one which was mandated).

>From a security standpoint, all those variants are flawed though (even the 
mktemp is subject to a race condition), there is a proposal by Lubomir Kundrak 
to fix the mess:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SecureBuildRoot
but so far it's just a proposal.

        Kevin Kofler