On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 16:29 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 07:07 -0800, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > >>
> > >> the repoquery isn't enough to provide the necessary information to
> > >> learn about dependancy chains to allow for maintainer coordination?
> > > No.
> > >
> > > [Personal side-note: I hate repoquery.
> >
> > Heh, care to elaborate? I'm open to suggestions you know :)
>
> Speed, usability, package deps (of yum and yum-utils).
Speed and dependencies I can't help directly, usability suggestions are
most welcome. Repoquery started with some sort of "rpm -q" compatibility
in mind and that's why it's the way it is. Suggestions are most welcome,
the rpm -q compatibility is an illusion at best anyway.
> > > It's way less useable than its apt-get counterparts]
> >
> > What apt-get counterparts?
>
> apt-get build-dep
> apt-get --build source
>
> Do you need anything else?
Repoquery isn't inteded for that, so no wonder you don't like it for
these purposes :) It's an utility to allow extracting every piece of
info there is in a repository/repositories (ultimately). You can get the
build dependencies out of it ('repoquery --requires foo.src') but it
won't install them for you, yum-builddep from yum-utils exists for that
purpose (hint: I missed apt-get build-dep too :)
Retrieving the source can be done with yumdownloader, but for the build
part there doesn't exist any yum counterpart, mostly because nobody has
wanted one bad enough I guess.
> > Sure you can dig out quite a bit of information
> > from apt-cache but it has nothing like the formatting capabilities of
> > repoquery etc.
> I don't have much use for these.
>
> What I need is a simple way to rebuild packages without having to dig
> into details, basically
>
> apt-get build-dep <package>
yum-builddep <package> (package can be local or in a repo)
> apt-get source <package>
yumdownloader --source <package>
Of course the problem with these has been that the SRPM repositories
haven't really existed at all (in FC4 and earlier), never mind being set
up by default.
> rpm -U package.src.rpm
> edit package.spec
> [rebuild package]
>
> This even works sufficiently well on underpowered machines with low
> bandwidth connections, and is much less resource demanding than yum is.
I haven't done any actual comparisons memory-wise between apt and yum in
long time, but yum >= 2.4 has far lower memory requirements than it used
to have, thanks to sqlite. Rpm headers are the really costly part for
memory consumption - apt might be able to complete that in less memory
because it doesn't use the full headers but for the final transaction
memory requirements should be about the same these days. Unless
rpm-python causes some significant overhead wrt that - dunno.
- Panu -
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
