On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 09:00:08 -0700, 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 What about setting up a simple tiny chroot just for this application? -- -- Dan Vrátil vratil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: +4202 732 326 870 Jabber: progdan@xxxxxxxxx Tento email neobsahuje žádné viry, protože odesílatel nepoužívá Windows. / This email does not contain any viruses because the sender does not use Windows.
