Le 13/03/2014 19:43, Bruce Dubbs a écrit : > Pierre Labastie wrote: > >> I have found 2 sources for pax: >> - the mirbsd package, debianised by Debian (the "orig" I put in the >> ticket). It does not build as is, because the debian "rules" (a makefile >> actually) are shipped separately, and those rules use heavily the debian >> packaging system. So we would first have to make a package and put it on >> anduin. Also, According to some internet sources, the mirbsd pax program >> does not provide the pax format (?), and so, does not pass the lsb tests. >> - the heirloom package. You have to download the full heirloom >> "toolchest" (not a big deal, it is just 1MB), then edit a config file (I >> think a couple of sed's is enough), then issue various make commands (if >> you do not want to build the whole toolchest). It seems more doable, but >> I may miss some pros and cons, so I ask on this list whether there are >> issues with the heirloom package (it does not seem to be much used by >> distros) > I've never used pax. IMO, the only reason to have it is for LSB > compatibility. That would seem to rule out mirbsd, but I can't > understand Debian not meeting LSB requirements. > > As for the heirloom toolchest, can you answer some basic questions: > > What packages are available besides pax? A lot of utilities (bc, diff, ed...), see http://heirloom.sourceforge.net/tools.html > Do they conflict with programs from other packages? They have the same names as the utilities in coreutils or other packages. They default to be instaloled into otehr directories. OTOH, I think it is possible to just copy the pax executable (it is statically linked by default) to its final location, so that the other utilities are not installed. > > I'll ask on the LSB mailing list and see if they know. > > Thanks Pierre
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
