[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: packaging suggestions.



On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 15:21 -0500, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 15:05 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 08:54 +1300, Michael J Knox wrote:
> > > I am attempting to package bro (bro-ids.org) and have a couple of
> > > questions. 
> > > 
> > > When bro is installed it installs its self into /usr, which is fine, but
> > > it also creates a bunch of directories like:
> > > 
> > > /usr/archive
> > > /usr/logs
> > > /usr/policy
> > > /usr/reports
> > > /usr/scripts
> > > /usr/site
> > > /usr/var
> > > /usr/etc
> > > 
> > > Now I am using the "%configure" macro. 
> > > 
> > > Are the any issues, reservations, conflicts of packaging policies that
> > > the above will create? 
> > 
> > I don't think I've ever seen the FHS so blatantly violated. Most of
> > those things look like they should go under /usr/share/bro, with the
> > exception of logs, var, and etc. And possibly reports.
> 
> Bro-ids has some seriously messed up Makefile.am files.  Instead of
> using automake to determine directories they hardcode everything to
> ${prefix}/<dir>.  I'm wondering if it even honors DESTDIR.  They install
> a VERSION file into ${prefix}/etc.  I haven't looked at the code but my
> guess is it hard codes the locations of its data files.  I would say
> this all needs to be fixed to use the proper autotools macros before it
> can be packaged correctly.

Sounds like what I was thinking. 

Guess I will take a stab at it today, since work is rather quiet. 

Michael


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]