Comment 40 for bug 102212
Revision history for this message
| Justin M. Wray (wray-justin) wrote Re: [needs-packaging] Metasploit Framework 3.0 | #40 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
513534c
demo site
(Get the code!)
Sorry -- Seems Launchpad added some of my responses as "quotes," thus I reposted.
> Someone has claimed that leaving .svn around is against debian policy,
> which would be understandable...
We need to check into this a bit more, as I asked about the policy (when I started working on MSF), and was told, it is not against policy, just frowned upon. The problem, without the SVN updates, the user would be unable to pull the new exploits and modules. And its almost pointless to repackage and distribute the entire binary deb every time one exploit is released, which may only be 15 lines of Ruby. If we do decide to scrap the SVN update capability, we will need to come up with a update path for exploits/modules.
Seems in this case we just ignore the SVN issue.
Also, some of the errors linda/lintian is producing are due to the windows files packaged within MSF and the fact that some of the ruby modules aren't set as executable. This can easily be fixed by a patch (if not safely ignored).
> Here is the script I whipped up...let me know if you find any issues with it...
Can you create a diff patch of the end result of your script. That it what we would use in the Package, as well as what the MSF devs would want to see.
Thanks,
Justin M. Wray