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

Re: Caldera's RPM

DISCLAIMER:  Yes, I work for Caldera.  No, I do not develop (most of)
Caldera's rpm packages (the good folks in Erlangen do that).

Kenneth Porter wrote:
> I'm assisting a developer working under the Caldera OpenLinux umbrella
> with packaging, and he reported that his RPM lacks the %{version}
> macro. I just looked at Caldera's download pages and see that they're
> still using rpm-2.4.5. What's up with that? Are RPM packagers condemned
> to turn away Caldera users?

I would like to know where you went (ftp or http URL, please) that the
first rpm version you saw was 2.4.5; we should not have things
configured on our sites to generate such confusion.

To my knowledge, _all_ of the Caldera OpenLinux 3.1 (Server _and_
Workstation) packages were built with rpm 3.0.6.OL (including

Kenneth Porter wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 13:38:30 +0100, Giulio Orsero wrote:
> <ftp://ftp.caldera.com/pub/OpenLinux3.1/RPMS/rpm-3.0.6-1.i386.rpm>
> >If you have an older release, you can try rebuilding the SRPM on that.
> Does that packaging include rpm-build? I don't see an rpm-build in that
> directory, just an rpm-devel.

The Erlangen folks did not create an rpm-build subpackage; all of the
rpm-build functionality is still in rpm-3.0.6 (and that I _do_ know, as
I've built one RPM with it).  One distinction from RedHat's rpm
packaging is that Caldera provides both macros.LSB and macros.nonLSB

And yes, to confirm what Jeff said, I use %{version} inside my .spec
file to define which tarball to build.

Mark Amidon                   | "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself
amidon@caldera.com            |  in an intellectual property sense to
(978) 251-1987 x252           |  everything it touches."
http://www.VolutionOnline.com |    -- MSFT's Steve Ballmer, lying

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