Re: failed dependency check after making my own RPMs

[Paul Nasrat <pauln truemesh com>]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:10:38AM -0400, Scot Mc Pherson wrote:
 
> I was under the impression that automatic dependencies (i.e. file dependencies 
> such as above) were not kept in the db.  Regardless, since this is trying to 

This may be wrong but - each rpm db entry provides files/dirs (with some
meta data if provided such as config, noverify, etc), with md5sums,
creation times, etc.  

> create a system with RPM from scratch ala LFS, I am going to try to just use 
> the --nodeps option while I am building the static software. 

This confuses me a little, I assume that you are building, installing
into the chroot using --nodeps.

> Then when it 
> comes time to building the system proper (after chrooting into the new static 
> environment), the deps for the final system software should be resolved?

It really depends on how you are building the system, there was an
attempt to do Linux From Scratch using rpm - http://www.puxedo.org/lvr/
however it uses xmlspec which although is in the rpm src now it does not
support the new api (transaction sets, etc).  I did a small amount of
work at updating it but it's not a priority - Jeff ISTR reading that
you're happy for things like xmlspec to be fixed up as alternatives to
"specfile" are worth investigating but not a priority for you.

> Can you explain this "bootstrapping" a little?  Is this like updating the rpm 
> db without actually having installed any rpms?

Yes rpm supports installing to an alternate db using --root and --dbonly
to perform the transaction on the db.

It would be useful if you documented the steps you go through and any
issues :)

Paul