Re: Moto binary

> > What RPMs do we need exactly ?
>
> Most projects will create a src.rpm file with each new release, then users
> will contribute the distribution specific rpms for versions that they have
> access.  I can provide rh7.2 rpms.

I can provide 7.3.

> > I figure new RPMs will be needed when new moto versions come out. Is
> > there any way we can automate construction of these RPMs for multiple
> > targets at once :)
>
> I believe the source rpm and spec file will help make it easier for others
> to contribute them.

I agree.

> > And I guess we would like a different package for each of the major
> > linux distros (rh,debian,suse,mandrake)
>
> Shay, do I remember you saying once that you use Mandrake?

It would be great to have a Mdk package, expecialy because they include a 
broad amount of software in their distros, so the chance to have moto on 
their Cds is very big.

> > How do the linux versions play into RPM construction ? Do we need a
> > different rpm for Redhat 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 8.0 ? Should we only ever
> > bother with the last two or three releases ?

I think we should follow the stable ones and the last one. 

	6.2 (but now it is too old), 7.2, 7.3 and 8.0 (not stable but new).

It should be quite simple to compile the src.rpm on various platform. Does 
someone have a machine with enough disk space and power to handle a couple of 
VmWare or Bochs virtual machines with various distros installed? 
Unfortunately not me.

Ah! Of course, 8.0 ships with apache2! But, at the moment, I suppose that a 
few are using rh8.0 on server machines. I have a basic patch for compiling 
moto against apache2, but it is not ready for production.

> > Your spec file uses the Redhat layout. I haven't used that layout on my
> > own installations in ages :) but it seems to work. I worry a little
> > that the RH layout isn't really up to modern RH standards ... could
> > someone take a look at the layout and see if it makes sense ?

Good idea! I didn't have any big problem on my 7.3, but we should give a 
deeper loopk at it.

> I don't think so.  RPM users would compile from source if they either
> a) knew how, or b) had the time.  I am all in favor of maintaining any
> consistancy with the Red Hat way of doing things when creating RPMs.

I agree. If we produce rpms, then we should aim at having them compliant to 
RedHat structure. After all it is the "Redhat Package Management". 

Stefano