pam src rpm replaced?

[Michael Schwendt]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:47:45 +0200, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:

>  While I am at it, I reported a simple missing BuildRequires for pam three 
> weeks ago, but I haven't seen any reaction on bugzilla yet 
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101563).

Well, activity log disagrees:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_activity.cgi?id=101563

> Why does it 
> have to take so long just to fix such a simple bug for which a fix is 
> provided? Not that I expect new pam rpms to be released for a single 
> BuildRequires, but a simple "this will be fixed in the next release" would 
> be nice.

Concerning missing buildrequires, it would be nice if someone from Red
Hat could post a short comment on how clean their build environment is
and whether they are interested in learning about src.rpm build
problems. Maybe flex is an essential component in Red Hat's build
environment? Similar to gcc/g++/make and a few other tools. There are
other packages with incomplete build requirements which fail to build in
a clean environment.

- -- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/R21C0iMVcrivHFQRArMnAJ44+dKGCZtnuTRGY//YBnFSB3I+3QCfQLZm
Rk3dGygz5WkB7mS9IiV8u2Q=
=XJB+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----