On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Honza Horak <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is basically a kick-off for getting more feedback for an idea shared > at http://www.themindiseverything.eu/2017/03/software- > collections-daemons-made.html. > > Shortly, SCL has worked nicely for several years and people love them. But > even the beloved ones have some issues. And what we hear from users, the > issues with Software Collections concept currently are basically those: > > * we need to use scl enable, which changes $PATH and other environment > variables, so the binaries placed in different location are visible by the > system > * scripts originally written for "normal" MySQL use full paths (like > /usr/bin/mysql) which does not work when we only have the Software > Collection installed > * Data directory, config files and log files are on different location > than it is common > > The blog post tries to summarize possible solution, which I'm looking for > feedback now, ideally by replying to this mail.. > > Hi Honza, I do love SCLs and I share most of the pitfalls you raised about using them (I would have loved not to write tons of custom scripts to manage my various parallel PHP / Nginx versions on my systems). Do you foresee a way to deal with package dependencies ? I might be wrong but when I'm installing packages that requires php(language>=5.3) it doesn't see rh-php56 or rh-php70 scls It's a bit cumbersome because I end-up having the default package installed whereas I'm only using the ones that come from SCLs Last, as an alternative to wrapper package, I find useful the "update-alternative" from debian. It's pretty much the same thing (links AFAIK) but switch is done with a command rather than a package install. Manuel
_______________________________________________ SCLorg mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/sclorg
