even where rsyslog is included in a distro it's very handy to have a spec file (or debian equivalent) included with the source to allow a 'make rpm' or 'make deb' to properly make packages.
I've been using checkinstall to create debian packages from the compiled source, and I don't know what it's doing wrong, but I've been tripped up a few times by it not replacing all the files that it should if rsyslog is already installed (the packages it creates work just fine if rsyslog isn't installed at all) David Lang On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > Hi RB, > > thanks for all your hard work. I am absolutely willing to help make > succeed in that. Just one question before we do down to details. Are > there any other options that we can pursue? I remember, quite some time > ago, that someone posted the idea that some well-known (non-RH, not > EPEL) repositories exist. Unfortunatley, I do no longer know which these > were. > > So the question is: are there any other such repositories where RHEL > users turn to and, if so, can we work with them to achieve our joint > goals? > > Sorry for some backtracking here... > > Rainer > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of RB >> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 4:54 PM >> To: rsyslog-users >> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Get rsyslog to always use fqdn of sending >> devices? >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 13:11, RB <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Regardless, I'll take the flag and see what I can do to get a >>> readily-accessible reasonably current build available for CentOS-5. >> >> Good & bad news - the good news is the Fedora upstream is very >> responsive, the bad news is I got sidetracked after his response. >> >> I have been told that rsyslog cannot be put in EPEL since it is >> already packaged in RHEL, be that package good or bad. Tomas has >> offered to help with the SPEC should I have any problems, but it looks >> like we're on our own for the time being. >> >> RPM package distribution can be done to various depths. The simplest >> is to just provide both the SRPM and unsigned binary RPMs for a few >> chosen CPU architectures for each packaged release as an HTTP or FTP >> download. This would allow one-off installations (updates would be >> manual) and generally get the package 'out there' for use. Further >> steps would involve signing the binaries and possibly publishing a >> repo that users could subscribe to (using /etc/yum.* or equivalent) >> for automated updates. >> >> Distributing a binary package in whatever form is going to increase >> the load (however mildly) on the project - each release will involve >> compiling and distributing binaries and SRPMs, if not signing them as >> well. I can work with you [Rainer] to automate that process, but as a >> random user I should probably not be doing the compilation and signing >> myself. >> >> So, we have 4 basic questions: >> 1. What versions are desired? >> 2. Are there any rsyslog components or functionality not packaged in >> the Fedora distribution users here would like to see included? >> 3. Do we want to sign the packages? >> 4. Who will perform the compilation/signing? >> _______________________________________________ >> rsyslog mailing list >> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog >> http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
