On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Lew Wolfgang <wolfgang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: > On 10/02/2010 06:10 PM, Steven Susbauer wrote: > >> On 10/2/2010 7:41 PM, Lew Wolfgang wrote: >> >>> It works on all the major distros but fails to install >>> on Arch due to an RPM dependency. Their install script just fails saying >>> it can't find rpm. The script contains much ugliness and is McAfee >>> proprietary, so I doubt hacking it will be productive. >>> >>> So the question is: can Arch be configured/tricked into an rpm install? >>> >> >> Does their installer actually require use rpm to install, or just wants >> rpm to be there? Most distros allow you to install rpm, Arch is no different >> except it is in aur: >> >> aur/rpm 5.2.1-1 (153) >> The RedHat Package Manager. Don't use it instead of Arch's 'pacman'. >> >> If it actually uses rpm for the process, this is probably not the >> solution. Two package managers at once is not a good thing. >> > > I spent some time last night pulling the .sh file apart. It's a script > that unzips a binary that unpacks two rpm files (9-MB), one 32-bit ELF > program (8.9-MB), two cryptographic keys and an xml file. The script then > calls rpm to install the two rpm files, which contain tons of 32-bit system > libraries. These libraries have the same names as regular system libs, like > libc, libm, libresolv and libcrypt. This all makes me very nervous! Arch > not using rpm may be a blessing in disguise, I'm going to see if I can get a > waiver to not install this McAfee root-kit. > > Thanks for the help, > Lew > > Can't you try to install only the program itself without these libraries ? The libraries could be installable using pacman. -- Cédric Girard
