Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 85073 - out dated file in the rpm package
out dated file in the rpm package
Product: Red Hat Raw Hide
Classification: Retired
Component: mc (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jindrich Novy
Jay Turner
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2003-02-25 06:47 EST by Andy Shevchenko
Modified: 2015-01-07 19:03 EST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-10-07 12:20:07 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Andy Shevchenko 2003-02-25 06:47:31 EST
Description of problem:
mc-4.6.0-3.src.rpm from rawhide has outdated file called as "mc-cvs-unzip".
This file included in mainstream already.

Additional info:
Please, remove this file
Comment 1 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-03-31 12:05:00 EST
Are you sure? For FC 1 (mc-4.6.0-8.4) this file (*mc-cvs-uzip*)
explicitely gets copied to vfs/extfs (see the %prep stage in the spec
file). I can not find another occurence of that file in the build
tree. Also it does not exist in vfs/extfs in the tarball.
Comment 2 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-04-13 15:26:10 EDT
Indeed mc-cvs-uzip is (almost) the same as vfs/extfs/uzip.in.
Inclusion of the former seems redundant.
Comment 3 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-08-22 07:26:25 EDT
Please remove this redundant file and all references from the srpm and
spec file before the next security update.

This file seems to just sit next to uzip.in in the build tree. But
maybe I am overseeing some makefile patching...
Comment 4 Jindrich Novy 2004-10-07 12:20:07 EDT
The file mc-cvs-unzip is no more present since mc-4.6.4-0.1
Comment 5 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-10-08 03:19:15 EDT
Now would that be 4.6.1-0.1 or 4.6.1-0.4?
Comment 6 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-10-08 03:23:14 EDT
O, and could you be so kind *not* to change the version against which
this problem was reported? You are thus preserving context
information. TIA.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.