Kelly wrote:
On Wednesday, June 27, 2007 9:51 pm Thufir wrote:
Going back to expediency, ebuild ease of creation versus rpm ease of
creation: e-builds are easier due to the looser integration? What are
other factors, please?
I don't know about ebuilds, but RPM's are insanely easy to build if you know
how. I mean, you can tear off a huge collection of RPM's in a very short
time with a bit of knowledge of the spec file, and technically generating
your own RPM's = compiling from source anyway (I did 5 packages yesterday in
half an hour, though I doubt they'd fit the project's guidelines...).
I much prefer RPM to other systems I've used to handle this sort of thing,
because they're easy to make and easy to use.
There is !no! difference in complexity of ebuild creation or rpm-spec
creation. If you have a broken source tar-file and want to create
an ebuild or a rpm-spec you have the !same! problems with your
rpm-spec-file as with your ebuild file. You have nearly the same
pre/post(un)install scripts to write and the runtime/buildtime
dependency hell is also the same (ebuild:RDEPEND/DEPEND,
spec:Requires/BuildRequires...) Therefore I can't see that ebuilds
are looser integrated. Perhaps you must be a better shell programmer
when you want to create your own ebuilds - that's all.
best regards
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jochen Schlick
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
