hi Justin,
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 07:21, Justin Findlay wrote:
> I was aiming today to set up root on my box from rpms, meaning I wanted to
> add a small CVS update script to cron's list of duties which would update
> the source tree and from that precipitate the corresponding binary rpm's
> and rpm -U them into the system filesystem tree, seeing that it is wise to
> defer such housekeeping to adept rpm, but during the first rpmbuild rpm
> found some dependency error. I don't remember what it was.
The package building stuff (for both Red Hat and Debian GNU/Linux) is
somewhat out of date. It's one (of many) of my projects to freshen that
up a bit. I've already sent some patches to Fons, that'll make the
packaging work smoother. These patches hasn't been merged upstream yet,
which is a bit of a show stopper for the rest of the changes.
I haven't got the faintest idea of how to specify build-dependencies (or
normal ones for that matter) in the RPM spec files, so you'll have to
read the README/INSTALL closely to extract that information. If anybody
knows how to specify build-dependencies in the spec file, please let me
know.
Note, that Debian has a very elaborate mechanism for handling both
build- and install-dependencies.
> But, I do have a point (finally) and a corollary. My point is is the rpm
> stuff in ROOT important enough to be actively tested and maintained,
> perhaps even supplying rpm'd builds along with each release? The
> corollary is that building root_v10.01 with the provided spec failed for
> me.
I do try to keep the package building stuff up to date, but I do have a
limited amount of time available for such things. I'm not a RPM-savy,
so I rely heavily on the (poor) documentation of RPM, and what ever
adivice others may give me.
Also, my main work place is a Debian GNU/Linux machine, so I'm mostly
interested in keeping that up to date. However, the package building
stuff is made so that most of the information is shared between the RPM
spec file and the Debian directory.
> [justin@archimedes justin]$ uname -a
> Linux archimedes.adam-ondi-ahman 2.4.22-1.2129.nptlcustom #3 Tue Dec 2 01:07:47 MST 2003 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>
> Were I more rpm savvy I would offer to maintain ROOT's rpm functionality
> myself or point to someone who could and would because rpm remembers what
> it has done, when I always don't, and other reasons rpms supersede (at
> least prebuilt) tar balls I shall not enumerate here.
Active testers are ofcourse always welcome. Especially if you can
provide detailed information (not just the output of `uname -a` - it
doesn't really tell me anything but your kernel version and CPU type -
pretty useless when you're dealing with something like building RPM or
Debian packages).
I agree that it would be a good idea if the ROOT team could build RPMs
and Debian packages as part of their release cycle. Valeri has a point
in saying that there are a lot of compilers available for GNU/Linux.
Therefor, I'd suggest that the ROOT team got a set of machines running
off the shelves version of
Disribution Status Version | CPU
-----------------+----------+---------+-------
Red Hat | `stable' | 9.0 | i386
Debian GNU/Linux | `woody' | 3.0r3 | i386
SuSE | `stable' | ??? | i386
and build the packages for those systems, using the system default
compiler, and what ever optinal packages they can dig up. However, the
optional packages should be widely available in a native form (that is,
as a binary package - not a custom build).
Of course, if ROOT would choose a different licence, like say the LGPL
or even the GPL, and do away with the clause the prohibits
redistribution of derived work with out an explicit consent, ROOT could
go into `contrib' (or even `main') branch of Debian GNU/Linux anf the
Debian auto-builders would take care of doing regular binary package
build of ROOT for Debian GNU/Linux. I have no idea whether Red Hat has
or will have a similar feature.
Yours,
--
___ | Christian Holm Christensen
|_| | -------------------------------------------------------------
| | Address: Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th. Phone: (+45) 35 35 96 91
_| DK-2200 Copenhagen N Cell: (+45) 24 61 85 91
_| Denmark Office: (+45) 353 25 404
____| Email: cholm@nbi.dk Web: www.nbi.dk/~cholm
| |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:50:17 MET