> From: "Ian C. Sison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Gee a long reply.  A few short comments.  You are 100% right, for
> instances wherein you need to 'graft' an alien package into an 
> existing distro, you come up with a whole slew of dependencies.  
> I've encountered that more times than i care to admit, 

Indeed, the first time I encountered this situation, I 
immediately understood why this more experienced (at the 
time) friend of mine dissed RH in favor of Slackware. 
I didn't yet realize how easy it was to make Slackware 
packages at that time, so I still valiantly struggled 
with rpm thinking it was easier to learn (that's the 
impression it gave) but dependency management was too 
much for me, so I said screw them and ended up doing 
make installs (yuck).

Also, why, oh why, did RH choose to make rpm use cpio 
instead of tar/gzip???

> but i don't find it quite a problem, i've recompiled gcc 3.2 
> and a whole slew of other needed packages on mandrake 7.2, 
> just because i needed to get openoffice compiling and running 
> on that platform.  I've invested the time and effort to make 
> these packages THE RPM WAY, simply because when i'm all done, 
> i can simply install 
> the RPMs on any mandrake 7.2 system via a simple command.
 
You've got a much higher pain threshold than me, I'd say 
that. :-D

> Sure the tarball way can be done the same way but who wants 
> to keep on repeating those build commands on 30 other boxes?  
> Wheather you do it the RPM way or the tarball way or the 
> slackware pkgtool way you STILL HAVE TO BE AWARE OF 
> DEPENDENCIES.  

But you don't have to repeat those build commands under
Slackware either! Just bring your compiled staroffice tarball 
over and do:

installpkg openoffice-1.0.0.tgz

plus installpkg xxx-a.b.c.tgz of whatever other stuff 
OpenOffice depends on. That's it! Of course these would 
all be post-compiled binary tarballs now, not source 
.tar.gzs.

IMPORTANT POINT REGARDING THE TERM 'TARBALL':

The term 'tarball' seems to more correctly refer to 
ONLY a Slackware _package_ with an extension of .tgz.
One that can be cleanly removed and installed via 
installpkg and removepkg. 

It should NOT refer to a .tar.gz source distribution. 
Giving the latter an extension of .tgz or calling 
it a tarball, which is what I used to do, is not 
strictly correct, as it turns out.


> So what's the added value of using lesser technology?

I see the Slack package system as simpler, not necessarily 
lesser.


_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fully Searchable Archives With Friendly Web Interface at http://marc.free.net.ph

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to