Lynn Avants wrote:
I did some brief looking over of the ipkg stuff, and while it does look like a useful packaging system for "conventional" systems, I didn't see anything that made it more appropriate for LEAF than debs or rpms, other than size.On Friday 17 January 2003 10:55 am, Erich Titl wrote:Hi Lynn & group0.6 looks pretty antiquated to me. I believe they are at 0.99 now. Apparently the C-based stuff is the way they go and should the developers decide this is the way to go I think we should stick with the latest releases.I downloaded the latest CVS (0.99-43) and compiled it. There may have been a libc problem that I bypassed, but I'll need to make a package/repository and test it. The depends should be wget, busybox, and possibly md5. If anybody is killing themselves to take on some testing, let me know.
Specifically, LEAF re-builds a system image in ram after every boot, requiring the ability to easily re-build packages with modified configuration data (initial LRP systems) or save configuration data seperate from the main package (current Dachstein/Bering partial backups).
In my brief look through the ipkg docs, it doesn't appear to support easy re-building of a package from currently installed data, although I could be wrong. I also didn't see anything about storing configuration data seperately, although I could have missed this, and it shouldn't be too hard to add, if needed.
--
Charles Steinkuehler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte
are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE
Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues.
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en
_______________________________________________
leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
