[-dpkg: see at the end] On Mon, 1 May 2000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, 1 May 2000, J.A. Bezemer wrote: > > > Question: now all apt-things are static, but... does apt-* need dpkg(-*) > > for any purpose???? > > Yes.. and dpkg needs tar, and gzip, and a bunch of other odd ball things > (like cat, don't ask) Okay, but that is not a problem, since old libc5 versions of these will work fine too. (talking e.g. 1.3.1 -> 2.2) Apt may/will use advanced features of _dpkg_ that are not yet present in older versions. I've done some more testing, and it seems apt only needs dpkg, dpkg-deb and dpkg-split. With static versions of these, I've succeeded in (partially) upgrading 2.1 to 2.2. At the moment I don't have diskspace and time to test any other upgrade, but if we have "official" static versions, more people are likely to give it a try. > make STATICLIBS=yes LFLAGS=-static > > Makes static binaries. You don't actually have to change anything. > > Use ONLYSTATICLIBS=yes if you don't want to wait for the shared library to > build too. Not building a shlib means the resulting apt package cannot > provide support for capt, aptitude and gnome-apt. You even thought about it ;-) Okay, this seems a very easy way of upgrading, that's worth persuing. Especially since I don't hear of other ways... >>>> So, I would urge you to produce "official" static apt and dpkg packages _now_, because these must go on the potato testing CDs. Also alpha, m68k and sparc! They should eventually go in debian/dists/potato/main/upgrade-$ARCH, but since ftpmasters seem to be too busy, you'd possibly better put them on some private web-locations as well. I'll try to make sure they end up on the CDs if you tell me where to get them. My dpkg kludge was in build/Makefile.conf: LDFLAGS = -static and NLS_LIBS = empty, since there's a symbol clash between libc6 and libintl. Regards, Anne Bezemer
