You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dr. Ralf S. Engelschall dd7aeed044 fix ncurses build 24 years ago
00DEV adjust paths 24 years ago
a2ps require flex and bison 24 years ago
amd requires also bison 24 years ago
analog Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
antiword Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
apache backout temporary fix now that I found out the problem in src2make 24 years ago
apg fix building 24 years ago
autoconf Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
autogen autogen requires GNU make 24 years ago
automake Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
axyftp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bash Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bc bc requires flex 24 years ago
bind BIND requires GNU make for correct DESTDIR handling 24 years ago
binutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bison Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
boxes fix dependencies 24 years ago
bzip2 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
c2man fix Vendor 24 years ago
calc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cftp cftp uses Automake; fix Vendor name. 24 years ago
cpio Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
curl Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cvs Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cvsweb Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
db Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
dcron Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
delegate upgrade to delegate 7.7.0 24 years ago
dhcpd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
diffutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
dmalloc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
docbook Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
emacs better to use GNU make and override also exec_prefix 24 years ago
epm Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
exim make sure exim finds the db library 24 years ago
fetchmail Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
figlet Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
file Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
fileutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
findutils Fix installation procedure (determined by src2make) 24 years ago
flawfinder Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
flex switch back to the release version 24 years ago
freetype requires GNU make 24 years ago
gated Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gawk Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gcc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gettext Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ghostscript Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gimp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
glib fix installation 24 years ago
glimpse Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gnupg GnuPG uses GNU Automake 24 years ago
graphviz Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
grep Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
grepmail fixed group 24 years ago
groff Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gtk Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
guile Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gup Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gzip Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
heise Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
hexer Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
htdig Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
html2latex Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imagemagick Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imapd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imlib Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
indent Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
infozip Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
inn Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
instant Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
iozone Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ircd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ircii Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
iselect Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ispell fix URL 24 years ago
its4 fixed group 24 years ago
jitterbug Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
jpeg Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
kermit Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lame Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
less Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lftp upgrade to lftp 2.4.7 24 years ago
libiconv Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libpcap Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
librsync New package: librsync 0.9.5 This is the rsync(1) algorithm put into a nice new library plus an interesting rdiff(1) program. 24 years ago
libtool Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libxml Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libxslt Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
limo Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
links Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lmtp2nntp upgrade to lmtp2nntp 1.1.1 24 years ago
logsurfer Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lrzsz Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lsof Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lynx Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
m4 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
magicpoint Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mailgrep Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
majordomo Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
make Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
minicom Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mirror Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mkgallery Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mkisofs Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mm Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mng Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mozilla blind update of (perhaps still broken) Mozilla 24 years ago
mpack Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mpg123 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mtools Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mutt Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
myodbc upgrade to 2.50.39 24 years ago
mysql upgrade to mysql 3.23.45 24 years ago
nail upgrade to nail 9.28 24 years ago
nano Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ncftp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ncurses fix ncurses build 24 years ago
netcat Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nmap upgrade to nmap 2.54b30 24 years ago
nntpcache Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nslint new package: nslint 2.1a2 24 years ago
ntp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openjade Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openldap Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openpkg fix bootstrap version 24 years ago
openssh Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openssl fix compilation 24 years ago
orbit Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
par Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
patch Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pcre upgrade to PCRE 3.7 24 years ago
pdksh Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
perl fix version 24 years ago
perl-gd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
perl-ssl Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
petidomo Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pgp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
php Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pinfo Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
png Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
portsentry Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
postfix upgrade unstable version 24 years ago
prngd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
procmail Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
proftpd Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
psutils fix Vendor 24 years ago
pth Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pureftpd upgrade to pure-ftpd 1.0.3 24 years ago
python Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
qpopper Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
qt Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rcs Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
recode Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rfc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rrdtool Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rsync temporarily disable this 24 years ago
ruby Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
samba Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sasl Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
scanssh Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
screen Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sed Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sendmail Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sfio Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sgml Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sgmlfmt Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sharutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shellutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shiela Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shtool Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
siege Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sitecopy Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
skey Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
slang Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
smtpfeed Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
snmp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
squid fix Vendor 24 years ago
ssmtp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
str Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
strace Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
stunnel Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
suck Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sudo Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tar Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tcl fix vendor 24 years ago
tcpdump Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tcsh Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
termutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tetex Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
texinfo upgrade to 4.0d because 4.0 fails on installation 24 years ago
textutils Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tiff Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tin upgrade to tin 1.5.10 24 years ago
txt2man Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
txt2pdf Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
txt2regex Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
units Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
unixodbc Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ups Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
uucp Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
uudeview Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
vim Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
w3m Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
wget Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
whatmask Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
whois Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
wml Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xdelta Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xmake Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xmame Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xterm Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zebra Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zlib Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zope Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zsh Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
00README Initial revision 24 years ago