On Sep 22, 2010, at 4:59 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >> > > Yep, RPM already has this whole ecosystem covered - SRPMs are their "ports" > and the RPMs their packages. However, I think we can also all agree that the > "spec" format for declaring all of this has always been pretty ugly (I don't > know what Jeff has in store for RPM's future, but right now we have what we > have) and we don't necessarily want to target it without a good reason. > Arguably, we also have a really good build system already, so all of those > portions of RPM would be redundant extra code to carry around, in a certain > sense, and what we really need are just the package delivery bits so RPM is > probably overkill. >
Hint: rpm embeds tcl these days, as well as sqlite3. Wiring up port build recipes should not be impossibly hard, and with embedded sqlite3, there's no need for *.spec templating, which was alway kinda feeble. And mongo.rpm5.org infrastructure is currently being stabilized, keys.rpm5.org is already in place. Apple CDMA is passing some generate/sign/verify tests, but I'm gonna need an ASN.1 layer to convert OpenPGP -> X.509 in order to use Apple CDMA. 73 de Jeff _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
