On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Paul Lussier wrote:
> With the exception of a proprietary package in binary form only, why not just
> use the source?
For all of the reasons you use package management tools in the first place:
- Build once, install many (BOIM?)
- Database of packages and the files they "own"
- Dependency management
- Uninstall
- Verification
- Queries
- Upgrades
> I find it's almost always easier to install source when I need to heavily
> customize a package than it is trying to work around the brain-dead
> options some rpm/deb maintainer thought I should use.
That's one of the really nice things about RPM. You can grab the SRPM and
unpack it in one easy motion. You can then examine the spec file to see what
it does, check out the patches it applies, selectively remove patches or add
your own, and then rebuild binary packages for multiple platforms for future
use. And if you want to build from "pristine sources", well, the original
tarball is right there if you want it.
Granted, there are always times where building from source "the old
fashioned way" is appropriate. But for a lot of situations, you don't need or
want that level of customization. Given Mission Critical's target market, I
can imagine enterprise deployments where you are rolling out hundreds or even
thousands of systems. In such cases, building your own binary package(s) with
your own customizations really makes a lot of sense.
> Need to install it on 8 different machines of similar architecture, tar
> the directory up, move it to the other machines, a simple for loop at the
> command line running rsh/ssh <machine-name>"cd <somewhere>;make install"
> does the trick.
Or, do "rpm -bb --target foo", and you can do it all from one machine, from
one directory, with one set of sources, and get as many binary packages for as
many platforms as you want. Of course, that might be too easy for you... ;-)
> They never allow for the possibility that the machine you're installing
> on:
>
> - isn't the system it's going to run on
> - isnt' a pristine installation with other things installed
> - may not be the system you're actually sitting in front of
> - may be set up to have all software installed on an NFS mount
> rather than the local disk
Let me add to that: Why do so many companies feel a need to write a fully
graphical, X11-driven, installer shell simply to end up doing the moral
equivalent of "tar -x"?
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Net Technologies, Inc. <http://www.ntisys.com>
Voice: (800)905-3049 x18 Fax: (978)499-7839
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
