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

Re: What's the best way to distribute Binary RPMs?

On Tuesday 11 March 2003 07:59, Bharavi Oak uttered:
> Working on Red Hat 7.2 with RPM 4.0.3; building binary RPMs for my
> customer. The target is x86 SMP and non-SMP.
> The package that I am building contains driver modules that will go to
> /lib/modules/<kernel-version>/kernel/drivers ....
> I suppose that RPM (atleast 4.0.3) does not allow selective installation of
> files depending upon the platform. Hence I am building two separate RPMs...
> one for SMP and one for non-SMP. Is selective installation supported (going
> to be supported) in future versions?
> Any way, what is the best way to distribute drivers for multiple platforms
> .. in same .rpm or in separate .rpm files???
> Should the approach be the same as the manner in which kernel binary RPMs
> are built. for example kernel-2.4.7-10.i386.rpm and
> kernl-smp-2.4.7-10.i386.rpm. How is it done usually?
> Customer seems to prefer "two-in-one" RPM but conscience suggests separate
> RPMs. ..... confused .... please advise !!!!

There are a few ways you can go about this, most of them are a kludge.  The 
only clean way is to provide one rpm per kernel arch and/or smp/up.  The 
kludge is to use a %pre script to determine what kernel set to use, and based 
on that copy over the files necessary.  As a bonus,  if you don't have any 
modules included that match the kernel installed, you can have the modules 
built on the spot (if the customer has kernel-source installed).  ATI's 
binary firegl drivers work this way.

Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE
Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org)

Was I helpful?  Let others know:

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