On 2012-03-01 at 11:54:05 +0100, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote: > > > Question to upstream: does random_binary_data need to be _that_ big? > > > Seriously, it takes >97% of space in the tarball. :| > > I've written upstream and asked about it. > I'm still waiting for an answer from upstream, so I haven't done > anything for this issue yet. Upstream answered: the file was generated using os.urandom() or something to be able to test on a non-trivial file and will be removed from future releases to be generated as needed before running the tests. Should I repackage the orig tarball for this release or is it fine to keep it for now? -- Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature