>> *sigh* I can't see how beecrypt is failing since I've been using 4.1.2 
>> to build since 4.4.9 without a problem. Talk about a frustrating 
>> directory, I'm wondering if I should just build it without perl 
>> bindings. ;)
>>
> 
> Building without perl should get you a functional rpm executable.
> 
> However, its likely worth building the perl bindings if you use perl,
> the bindings are quite nicely done, and better than any other
> perl->rpm bindings I'm aware of.
> 
> 73 de Jeff


Definitely agree with you there. I was hoping to have perl functionality 
despite the troubles, but that seemed to be the last of the problems. 
Building it without them was just a temporary fix to see the package 
finished, but everything seems to be happy now.

-Dave