Re: rpm dependencies failure

El mar, 17-02-2004 a las 12:30, Eric Sandall escribió:

> Well, there's always just using the source tarballs of the package, but then the
> files installed won't be tracked. Slackware can do this for you, along with the
> source-based distributions (Source Mage, Lunar, Sorcerer, Gentoo, Rock, etc.),
> but the problem with this approach is it takes longer to install, since you
> have to wait for the package to compile, instead of just copying already-built
> binaries over.

I meant source tarballs are not an option for regular users.  I for one
cannot live without file tracking.

> 
> I've never made a .spec file, but you could probably just look at the ones
> offered and modify them to follow the FHS[0] and LSB[1],

that's one good tip.  DA already follows the FHS.

>  but you'll still have
> the problem of needing the exact versions of the libraries installed (unless
> you build everything statically, which would fix this problem, but make all the
> binaries larger).

I don't think that's necessary.  Dynamically linked binaries work
wonderfully, so long as you manually identify dependencies, because
automatic dependency identification leads to the problem someone
reported one day ago.

> 
> -sandalle
> 
> [0] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/
> [1] http://www.linuxbase.org/
-- 
	Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)
	GPG key ID: 0xC1033CAD at keyserver.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBAMl0OWyznNMEDPK0RArieAKCA7fAGhTaquJ13Ku4gCAPskjY7dgCfQW5/
CBEQu8nJW95Wg+zBwAv+Ays=
=w8rg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----