On Wed, Oct 12, 2005, Simon J Mudd wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:17:48PM +0200, Steve Weinreich wrote:
> >
> > --On Mittwoch, 12. Oktober 2005 15:54 +0200 Stijn De Weirdt
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >hi all,
> > >
> > >i just installed openpkg on scientific linux 3, which is a clone of rhel3.
> > >so i used
> > >sh openpkg-2.4.0-2.4.0.ix86-rhel3-openpkg.sh --prefix=/opt/openpkg
> > >to install openpkg.
> > >the result was:
> >
> > The OpenPKG Binary Pakages are not supposed to be relocated via the
> > --prefix commandline-option. They life in the /openpkg prefix. If you like
> > to have a OpenPKG Instance in another prefix use source packages and
> > rebuild all needed packages from the source. The first package you should
> > build is a custom openpkg package via
> >
> > $ ./openpkg-2.4.0-2.4.0.src.rpm --prefix=/opt/openpkg
> >
> > After that you could build more packages using
> >
> > % /opt/openpkg/bin/openpkg rpm --rebuild
> > ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/release/2.4/SRC/foo-X.Y-2.4.0.src.rpm
> >
> > or by using openpkg-tools. You can find more documentation on our
> > website[1] and there is also a nice tutorial[2].
> >
> > [1] http://www.openpkg.org/doc.html
> > [2] http://www.openpkg.org/tutorial.html
>
> Perhaps the "fault" therefore lies in the "binary" shell script not
> complaining about the --prefix option being presented to it?
>
> $ sh openpkg-2.4.0-2.4.0.ix86-rhel3-openpkg.sh --prefix=/opt/openpkg
>
> should give an error????
Just a warning, because I've added it to the binary shell script to
allow one to unpack the stuff into an arbitrary temporary location (not
for really running there, but for unpacking and inspection). So, a
warning should be displayed that this option cannot be used to really
_INSTALL_ a _USABLE_ instance.
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
