On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:31:52PM +0200, Udo van den Heuvel wrote: > On 01-08-19 16:27, Matthew Selsky wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:18:30PM +0200, Udo van den Heuvel wrote: > > > > See > > https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/commit/3ee8e4c3c3cf4b2d6f010874e7f447a23a1710cf > > for the change that we made to our CI targets. > > Sure, but why then is there a complaint from the Redhat Fedora tool(s)?
I don't think the Fedora tools use anything related to our CI targets so our change should have neither helped, not harmed. > > The debian package replaces the shebangs. You can see how at > > https://sources.debian.org/patches/ntpsec/1.1.3+dfsg1-2/hardcode-python3-path.patch/ > > > > You likely want to use the RPM macro that does the equivalent. I'm not > > familiar enough with RPM packaging to give more specific advice. > > > We have a tool.... OK, cool. I'd be happy to review what you come up with if you want. And if you have suggestions for improving packaging/packaging.adoc, I'd be happy to hear them. Thanks, -Matt _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
