Re: Suggestion: put .rpm & .deb packacking scripts in CVS

["Adam C. Powell, IV" <adam powell nist gov>]

Richard Browne wrote:

> Todd Graham Lewis wrote:
>
> > That said, it would be nice if 'deb' and 'rpm' were top-level make
> > targets, as well as FreeBSD's /usr/ports.  Are patches to accomplish
> > this welcome?

That would be cool, particularly for those of us on rare platforms, like
Linux/Alpha or /PPC (my two platforms), which are usually slow to get RPMs
up.  It would make it just a little easier for one person on these platforms
to build RPMs to share with our respective communities, by saving the one step
of having to learn the command to build RPMs. :-)

OTOH, the /usr vs. /usr/local issue could cause confusion for some
semi-newbies who get RPMs to build for some packages but not others, and mix
installation methods.  The autoconf system is quite complex and should not be
treated as otherwise- put another way, in some sense it's good not to make it
too easy to get into trouble. :-)  The benefit is so small, it's hard to say
whether on balance it would be a good thing.

> Even simpler perhaps, a script that does everything, including running
> configure before making all the sub-packages. This means a newbie can untar
> the files, run a single script, and have it all just happen. ?

Here I disagree.  IMHO, if someone is such a newbie that (s)he can't type

./configure
make install

then that person should probably be using RPMs.

Zeen,

-Adam `Cold Fusion' Powell, IV http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/~powell/ ____
USDoC, National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST)  |\ ||<  |
Center for Theoretical and Computational Materials Science  | \||_> |