Re: ... binary RPM question ...

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 15:10 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Jos Vos wrote:
> > If you don't have a Source: tag, where do you get your files from?
> > Out of the blue?  From "what's there at that moment"?
> 
> In this case of people trying to use rpm for closed sourced projects
> then usually the files will be installed by methods outside of rpm.
> So from your perspective, yes, they will appear "out of the blue".
> Of course this is frowned upon by free software advocates because it
> prevents the source from being distributed.  But as far as producing a
> workable rpm file this is okay from a technical perspective.

if you have to deviate from best practices, why not deviate only where
completely necessary? if something can be done with or without
deviating, why not choose not to deviate?

> 
> > This is against common RPM rules, even those that apply to packaging
> > binary software.
> 
> It is against most software rules/guidelines for distributing packages
> with a distribution (e.g. Fedora) but not against rpmbuild rules.  The
> rpmbuild program allows this fine.  The rpm process is okay with this.
> It is a philosophical issue and not a technical one.
> 

IMHO, most issues are philosophical, technicality must complement
philosophy.

> > The proper way, IMHO, is using the tar'ed binary tree as source
> > file.
> 
> Of course doing it this way is fine.  But it is not required.  Among
> other things bundling a binary blob in like that allows a .src.rpm
> file to be produced that could rebuild the binary .rpm file.  But
> because the source is not really source the .src.rpm file is not
> really useful.  It could not be used to port the code from 32-bit to
> 64-bit for example.  Therefore IMNHO in this type of case it does not
> really add anything over just having the files appear out of the blue.
> 

i disagree.
though i still think the source rpm should have the actual sources, to
make it useful obviously. i also think the build process should be done
via rpm, but if that is not possible, at least have the source rpm have
the actual source code tarball as SOURCE's, so that it is not an
unusable blob.

> Bob
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
-- 

Hiren Patel | Ops Specialist | ISS Infrastructure | Telkom
E-Mail:  patelhn@xxxxxxxxxxxx Office: +27 12 680 3460 | Fax: +27 12 680
3299 | Cell: +27 73 456 7980

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This e-mail and its contents are subject to the Telkom SA Limited
e-mail legal notice available at 
http://www.telkom.co.za/TelkomEMailLegalNotice.PDF
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

[Index of Archives]     [RPM Ecosystem]     [Linux Kernel]     [Red Hat Install]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Watch]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [IETF Discussion]

  Powered by Linux