On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: ...snip > > Can we just make the .spec build those modules, and ship only the > modules in the binary ( would need to also change the name of the > package ) ?? > > iptables-module-<foo> -> would that be a potential name ? Attached is a new src.rpm for a package that build the extra modules as seperate packages. > Has anyone done a packaging standard for iptables modules before ? I haven't but the packages are now called iptables-mod-<name> for iptables modules and iptables-ipv6-mod-<name> for ip6tables modules. Regards, Tim -- Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be at gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83 Hoping the problem magically goes away by ignoring it is the "microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed. (Linus Torvalds) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: iptables-extras-1.3.5-1.2.1.src.rpm Type: application/x-rpm Size: 214208 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20080331/ece06a98/attachment-0005.rpm>