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

Re: Vendor created RPM naming.

Ace Nimrod wrote:
> We provide our product as a set of RPMs for RedHat 4/CentOS 4 (and soon 5)
> and we require some RPMs that are upgrades of the base RPMs.  To prevent
> conflicts we install all our packages in /opt/<vendorname> and prefix all
> RPM packages with <vendorname>.  This will prevent us from overwriting any
> other RPMs, as well as RPMs overwriting ours.
> Is this sane?

Yes.  I believe that is very well done and exactly keeping in the
spirit of the /opt directory.  Note that existing Unix vendor practice
of using /opt in just this way has been around for a long time.

> So for example, we provide our own foobar package which is an upgrade to
> foobar in CentOS 4, we'd name it like..
>  <myvendor>.foobar-1.2.3-1.el4

I think the '.' separator is okay but most packages doing similar
things have previously used a '-' there instead. 

> Is there a better approach to take with this?  So far it seems to work just
> fine.

I like it!


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