Gene Heskett wrote: > I have begun to appreciate that where system related stuff is > concerned, the rpm path is a very good one. It tends to keep > dependency wolves at bay.
Indeed. > OTOH, if the system stuff is solid, then > I'd druther build accessory stuff like amanda, cups, gimp-print, > sane, even gimp from scratch because the configure scripts, > generally speaking, are very good at sorting out the diffs between > RHat and everybody else and giving one good usable code in all > situations, something the rpm's can't begin to discuss because they > are so "system" specific. rpm doesn't have to be system specific at all - it can just call ./configure in it's buildroot like anything else, and indeed, this is what most spec files actually do. [interesting points snipped] > BTW, my way isn't the only way to do it, far from it. Consistency > in how you do it should be your way as long as it works. Thats why > I emphasize useing a script to configure the girl. Sure - that's what the spec file essentially is, and why I reccomend using it to maintain a consistent build. Note, I'm not advocating using rpm's on non-Red Hat (or similar) systems! :) -- Rob Kearey Website: http://apac.redhat.com Red Hat Asia-Pacific Legal: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer +61 7 3872 4803 Stuff: http://people.redhat.com/rkearey
