Ace Nimrod wrote: > We provide our product as a set of RPMs for RedHat 4/CentOS 4 (and soon 5) > and we require some RPMs that are upgrades of the base RPMs. To prevent > conflicts we install all our packages in /opt/<vendorname> and prefix all > RPM packages with <vendorname>. This will prevent us from overwriting any > other RPMs, as well as RPMs overwriting ours. > > Is this sane? Yes. I believe that is very well done and exactly keeping in the spirit of the /opt directory. Note that existing Unix vendor practice of using /opt in just this way has been around for a long time. > So for example, we provide our own foobar package which is an upgrade to > foobar in CentOS 4, we'd name it like.. > <myvendor>.foobar-1.2.3-1.el4 I think the '.' separator is okay but most packages doing similar things have previously used a '-' there instead. > Is there a better approach to take with this? So far it seems to work just > fine. I like it! Bob _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
