> Hi all, > > At the moment I'm looking for a Sun-way of building > Solaris packages (Like SUNW), with a proper build > environment, but unfortunately there are too many > ways. I already have my own customized environment,
Sun-way is SVR4 pkgadd PMS, period. I don't work for Sun and I like to be proven wrong. You got the point, there are too many Unix PMS. Variation is not diversity. Variation increase the cost of any engineering task. > but I prefer to use a standard. The packaging guides > at http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-0406 doesnt > provide this kind of help. > > So far I've found different projects who have their > own packaging standards: > http://www.bpfh.net/computing/software/pkg-tools/ > http://www.sunfreeware.com/pkgadd.html > http://www.blastwave.org/standards/pkgcreation.php > http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/gnutopkg > http://netbsd.org/Documentation/software/packages.html > > http://www.openpkg.org please don't miss http://www.thewrittenword.com or http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/CPAM_with_TWW > All of these have their pros and cons. > > I found a very good discussion at: > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID= > 5520ᖐ > > Let me quote some of it: > > "I could not find a single person/could not find in > the documentation exactly how I was supposed to go > about adding software (such as apache 2/php5/etc, and > I don't mean outdated versions. - monolith" > > > "I recieved a lot of "use blastwave" "use > sunfreeware" responses, neither resource I care for > (no offense to the projects, they just aren't my > personal choice.) I've hand compiled/built > everything, including all dependancies required by > them, simply because I couldn't find a solution. This > creates a HUGE headache anytime there is a security > update released for ANY of the software, I have to go > download the updated source/patches/so forth, and > rebuild EVERYTHING one by one, making sure I get it > all installed properly without messing up this or > that. Imagine trying to do this by hand on 100 > systems, as you said, this is NOT the right way to go > about things. It's painfully obvious. - monolith" > > > "As far as the "accpted way" of software management > on a Solaris > system, well everyone has a "right" way of their own. > -swalker" > > > "If you want a quick and dirty way to create > packages for programs that > use "GNU" configure tools, and the like, use this > script: > http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/gnutopkg -swalker" > > > "Sun isn't like Gentoo or FreeBSD (I believe their > ports collection > is similiar to Gentoo) where you get 'rolling' > updates of > bundled software whether the updates are security > related or not. > You get tested, stable versions at the time of > shipment. -glagasse" > > > "The big difference though is that the cost of > entry for customization / > maintaining current status is a lot lower on Linux, > just because you get > the source packages. There's a lot less effort in, > say, changing your > distro's mysql-4.0.src.rpm to build > mysql-4.1.arch.rpm than there is in > creating a mysql-4.1 pkg from scratch. Or what if you > want the same > version that Sun shipped, but just need it compiled > with different > options? That's trivial on Linux distros, not so > trivial on Solaris.... -kaboom" > > > "Note also that for the GNOME bits we do use rpm > spec files to build and > do ship the full build environment. Darren J Moffat" > > > "OK, the .spec files will need some slight > modification from the Linux default, but in most > cases it is possible to write a single .spec - > Darren" > Are your .spec files public? Are you using OpenPKG > specs? > > > "Sunfreeware is just plain BUSTED because Steve > Christensen doesn't really understand how to package > software, to be more precise, he does not understand > how to engineer software packages. Or he doesn't have resource needed ;) > Sun clearly states in their Application Packaging > Developer's Guide how packages should be designed and > what to watch out for, but apparently he either > didn't pay attention or he just blatantly disregarded > it. -ux-admin" > This is still where you can get the latest built > packages. I believe this is a really valuable > resource, and if he didn't follow standards how > packaging is supposed to work, then who would? > > > "That's also the one big limitation of sunfreeware > / blastwave -- no > concept of a "source package" to use as a starting > point -kaboom" > > -> Thats what the SUNWmysqlS package is for, it is > intended to > be almost equivalent to the source rpm. However rpm > is both a build > and package system the SVR4 package system isn't > -darrenm. > I can't see any references to how to use -S packages > in the dev guide? > > > Sooner or later you'll hit the `make install` part, > which pollutes the consistency of a system. How do > you work around that? It turns out Solaris already > provides the facilities to do it. As it turns out, we > can trick `make install` with some clever and > 'creative' use of lofs(7FS), the loopback virtual > FileSystem. (`man lofs` might do good at this > point.) > This really causes some problems for me such as /etc, > because /etc/mnttab is missing, I can't even unmount > the filesystem after I loopback-mounted it ! > > > "what could very easily happen is fragmentation, > where we have trillion different OpenSolaris > releases, and each has its own poackaging > subsystem." > "Hey, last night I tried to install anjuta, and it > failed miserably!" > "Really??? What kind of error message did `apt-get` > give you?" > "Oh, no, no, I was doing `emerge anjuta`, and it > worked fine on bonnie but on clyde I'm running > OpenSolaris with `rpm` and when I did `rpm --rebuild` > it failed miserably... and tomorrow I have to install > Apache + mod_xslt2 on all the 25 machines at work, > except all of them are running OpenSolaris with a > different software packaging system..." -uxadmin > > What's stopping Sun from replacing the -pkg Format > with for example RPM? OpenSolaris will grow in the > next few years. Sure the old package standards could > work... and why replacing something that works? Isn't > it time to standardize, why not rebuild everything > from scratch?? Clearly there are problems with Sun > PKG, or else there wouldn't be that many side > projects on this. > > The best solution to all of this for now is: > http://pkgbuild.sourceforge.net/. It uses the rpm > .spec files to build and configure from source, and > also creates a PKG. If everyone would use this, > there's no need to read the packaging manuals, > because SUN has supplied a standard, and it's all > taken care of inside the pkgbuild application. Even > the build environment is standard similar to RPM > structure, "BUILD, PKGMAPS, PKGS, SOURCES, SPECS, > SPKGS". One big advantage is that [b]far more people > know how to use Linux RPM for building and > packaging[/b]. If OpenSolaris would use it, I'm sure > people would be interested in moving from Linux to > OpenSolaris. In the long run, I believe the SVR4 > packages are old you really need to think about > replacing it. I vote with my two hands to but in reality is that I can't. if OpenSolaris change its SVR4 PMS then I believe it just shut the door to IT center and become a household hobby OS. I will change this view if Solaris (not OpenSolaris) switch its SVR4 PMS. but hen that time come, I will call in Sun Reps to beat them up if Sun don't provide me a SVR4 to other PMS transistion solution. > > "Out of curiosity, did you work with any of these > alternative packaging systems in production? You > know, this already exists on Solaris and has existed > on UNIX for the past 30 years. -uxadmin" > Time for change? Improvement ? yes. Change to other PMS ? no. > What we really need is a Wiki and a forum like this > to start with. [b]Bring all the packagers, engineers > together and let them discuss the problems, > standards, etc etc.... ![/b] How about here ? http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSolaris or http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/CPAM_with_TWW/References_Manual Don't like the content ? modify it. it is a wiki. anybody can contribute. not just me. > Start a contest or something. Setup an organization > with representatives from all these projects, let > people (including Sun employees) write about the pros > and cons of SVR4, and why to keep or replace it! From > there someone should use the output of this to create > a [b]distribution[/b] built with this new standard. > > Right now, we really need a Blueprint on packaging > (especially Open Source applications like > Apache/MySQL, OpenSSL, OpenSSH, BIND, Sendmail etc), > the SUN way! Lofimounting, spec-files and all this. > > Note that I'm not against Sun SVR4 PKG, I already > have my own customized environment and it works... > But not everyone does! Monolith probably had got a > good headache reading through the application > packaging developers guide, and ended up using > Blastwave anyway. If he only knew about pkg-tools, he > could have built his Sun packages with a public > archive of Solaris-RPM specs. > > Hope to start a discussion here. discussion had happened in many other threads. Don't know when the dust will settle. tj This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
