![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/10f16bbc6d627156efefe8fab138f6f7.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 02:33:37PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The 03.05.05 at 06:48, Jon Clausen wrote:
I would have thought that the padlock was YOU's way of telling me that it regocnized this rpm as something it shouldn't update?
Change your release or build number to 999 (directory name), make and checkinstall. By the way, you didn't need to run checkinstall, you could reinstall your own freshly made rpm, that was saved to somewhere in /usr/src/package/RPM
Well... One good reason to checkinstall again, was precisesly that: I changed the build to 666 ;) I guess next I should try to let YOU have it's way, and see if it honours TNOTB... I mean, so long as the build is higher than any available patch it *ought* to 'win', right? Evenso, it seems more like a workaround... to me a padlock means "locked" period. (?) *Anyway* I'm gonna install the src.rpm for Mutt now, and have a look at the spec file, to see what's different than my own build... or wait... that thread about extracting files from rpms, does that apply to src rpms too? Cheers, Jon Clausen -- If we can't be free, at least we can be cheap!