Re: [WBEL-devel] Missing libpng and libpng10 updates
Tim Fournet <[email protected]> Thu, 27 May 2004 14:18:50 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.whitebox.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Perhaps this utility can be of help to help create distributed repositories: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/yam/ >From the description: Yam builds a local Apt/Yum RPM repository from local ISO files, downloaded updates and extra packages from 3rd party repositories. It takes care of downloading updates and extras, configuring HTTP access and providing PXE/TFTP resources for remote installations. On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 11:06, Simon Mudd wrote: > [email protected] (Paul Iadonisi) writes: > > > On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 15:41, Jesse wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > I don't know if John does extra steps, but you can roll your own for most > > > packages pretty easily. > > > > > > Download the SRPM. > > > rpm -ivh the SRPM > > > cd /usr/src/redhat/SPECS > > > rpmbuild -bb theprogram.spec > > > When it's done compiling, you should see a binary RPM in one of the > > > subdirectories of /usr/src/redhat/RPMS > > > > No! Don't do that! ;-) > > > > It's actually not a big deal if you do, but you've got an entirely > > unnecessary step in there. You simple need to do a 'rpmbuild --rebuild > > <SRPM>'. No need to install it first and then build from the spec > > file. Why bother doing that when it means you now don't know which SRPM > > to keep around for possible future purposes. I'd only keep a > > (differently named by changing the Release: tag in the spec file) self > > generated SRPM around if I made changes to it, like John's trademark > > changes. > > And frankly, if you're maintaining your own updates, the only custom > > ones you need are anaconda-images and redhat-logos. John has taken the > > safer (but more involved) route of removing anything that could lead one > > to believe that WBEL comes from Red Hat. Wise for WBEL, but not really > > necessary if you are maintaining your own binary RPMS built from SRPMS. > > The issue of the updates is what probably causes the delays (the > process is manual). > > Excluding the Whitebox modified rpms the ideal situation would be a > way to [A]: > > 1. detect new src rpms available on RedHat's ftp/web server > 2. rebuild them > 3. test the rpms [optional?] > 4. make the rebuilt binary rpms available to the public > 5. announce their availability > > Whitebox modified rpms would require the same process that John is > currently doing [B]. > > I am currently working on a build procedure[*] which will allow me to > do both [A] and [B]. The process is not as straightforward as it > should be [even when hosted on WBL] due to the fact that many > dependencies are not actually in the spec files and I don't like > having to install ALL rpms just to get the builds to work. There are > other issues too, apart from me working on this part time. > > However if we could automate the rebuild at least of the updates then > the work involved by John (or whoever) would drop dramatically and > also the RPMs would be made available much more quickly. > > Perhaps we can help John automate [A] leaving the problematic RPMs > aside for the moment then everyone will know that they can expect to > find updates binaries within a reasonably short time frame of the > source rpms being made available. > > I would be happy to work with someone to get this working. > > Regards, > > Simon > [*] ask me off list for more details. > _______________________________________________ > Whitebox-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://beau.org/mailman/listinfo/whitebox-devel