[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: portage vs yum
- From: Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at>
- To: fedora-devel-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: portage vs yum
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:21:25 +0000 (UTC)
Peter Gordon <peter <at> thecodergeek.com> writes:
> Erm; No. Gentoo's portage mirrors have a "distfiles" directory that contains
> copies of all source tarballs for current versions of Portage packages. When
> one installs the package (via "emerge app-foo/bar" as root or similar), it
> attempts to download the tarball from this distfiles mirror. Only if it fails
> on multiple mirrors (or as is configured otherwise in /etc/make.conf) does
> it attempt to grab the sources from the upstream download location.
At least Gentoo tries to mirror the sources (still, why not fetch them _only_
from the distfiles mirrors?), other source-based distributions won't even
bother doing that.
> Not necessarily; Portage has a tool called "revdep-rebuild" which takes care
> of rebuilding any package which no longer has proper dynamic library linkage.
Oh, I didn't know about that tool. But why do you have to do that by hand? It
should be automatic. Yum or apt won't update a library without also updating
the applications which depend on it to versions built against the correct
library.
> I concur with this. The first few RPM packages that I created were based
> quite heavily on Gentoo's ebuilds (not "recipes" - those are rPath/Conary)
I don't know why I couldn't remember the specific term, I knew it of
course. :-) But ebuilds, specfiles etc. are all "recipes". ;-)
Kevin Kofler
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]