Re: ... binary RPM question ...

[marks <marks adax com>]

Hi,

inline...

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Jos Vos wrote:

> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:52:22 +0200
> From: Jos Vos <jos xos nl>
> Reply-To: RPM Package Manager <rpm-list redhat com>
> To: RPM Package Manager <rpm-list redhat com>
> Subject: Re: ... binary RPM question ...
> 
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 05:54:35PM -0700, marks wrote:
> 
> > What I ended up doing is using the %prep section of the spec file to setup
> > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to contain the bare minimum linux filesystem content
> > (directories and files) required by our product install scripts. The
> > system directories and files that would get updated by our install script
> > needed to exist in advance of execution of the %install section described
> > below.
> > 
> > I then used the %install section to run our install script to install the
> > product in question to the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.  It helped that our install
> > scripts already supported relocatable root installations (i.e.  
> > installations to a virtual root directory other than /).  You should be
> > able to parameterize / in your install script to do the same thing.  
> > Start by creating an empty directory, populate it with system directories
> > and files you know are needed by your install script, then try installing
> > your product to this directory.  [...]
> 
> Better adapt the install script (if you can influence that) to do the
> following:
> 
> -  Create needed (system) directories if not already there (so that
>    you can always start with an empty buildroot).
> 
> -  Have a option to *not* modify existing files (or do that always when
>    an alternative root is given, but this may be undesired when the
>    alternative root is a "real" root fs).
> 
> > [...].  I decided to develop
> > as root since our install script required the user to be logged in as root
> > in order to execute.  [...]
> 
> Why not adapt the install script so that it can also handle non-root
> installs *if* an alternative root is given?

thanks for the comments...

In order to adapt/modify install scripts I would have to open every
product source node that needed to support rpm and start a development
cycle.  If I were to do that I may as well modify all the make files to do
"make install".  My goal was to not have to modify any existing product
files.  I didn't want to start a new product development/test/release
cycle for the sole reason of adding rpm support.  The course I have taken
will allow me to just include the new spec file in each product at a time
when that product is opened for development for other reasons.

> 
> -- 
> --    Jos Vos <jos xos nl>
> --    X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV   |   Phone: +31 20 6938364
> --    Amsterdam, The Netherlands        |     Fax: +31 20 6948204
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
> 

Thanks,

Mark Sincerbox