[CentOS-docs] u/d Newsletter/1003 by TimoSchoeler

Thu Apr 22 01:27:43 UTC 2010
Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com>

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

> thus R P Herrold spake:
>>>   Fetch the desired duplicity source code from
>>> https://code.launchpad.net/duplicity/, unpack it and change
>>> in its directory. There, just issue
>>> + {{{
>>> - python setup.py install
>>> + python setup.py install}}}
>> I see the above fragment in the draft newsletter, and frankly
>> am disappointed at proposed content not using the packaging
>> system.  It is clearly not a 'best practice'.  The item in
>> question will run as root, and one assumes will over time be
>> updated and have security fixes.
>> In a CentOS publication, we should not be proposing installing
>> time bombs that a later admin 'cannot see'.  We are all that
>> later admin as time packages and we forget the details of a
>> particular installation
> I absolutely agree with you; my 'plan' was to write it that way (in the
> draft), and -- if my spare time allows -- build an appropriate RPM and
> maybe even get it integrated in one of the repos. Then, I could modify
> it to the 'decent way'.
> As backup plan, I could just continue and use the not up-to-date
> rpmforge package.

Or provide a SPEC file for a duplicity update in RPMforge. It's not that 
hard, but don't expect someone else to do it for you...

--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]