On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 10:09:54AM +0200, Thomas Lotterer wrote: > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003, Matthias Kurz wrote: > [...] > > I upgraded the machines that build from sources with > > openpkg build -i -g -u openssl | sh > > > For standalone machines and "masters" as you describe them, a "openpkg > build -Ua" should be sufficent. I tried it on some instances and the > results looked fine. It even detected packages which used openssl due to > a conditional "with_xxx" option. As the generated script uses "--force", > don't forget to check the configuration. > > Being a little paranoid i also executed > > $ for i in `/cw/bin/rpm -q --whatrequires openssl`; do \ > /cw/bin/rpm -qi $i | grep "Build Time"; \ > done
Well, there is a difference between "rpm --whatrequires" and "openpkg build -L". And it makes sense in some cases to rebuild some of the additional packages picked by "openpkg build -L". I prefer to update one package too much than one package too little. > and checked if all eventually installed packages that directly depend on > openssl have been built recently. Needless to say, the last action is > always to test the final results. Yeah, i'm also ;) a bit unsure, when it comes to openpkg-tool and dependencies. That different output is generated for two consecutive calls with the _same_ option(s) doesn't make things easier. Though, i checked the output several times and could not find obvious errors. My main problem is that there are no examples/instructions. I don't want to say that there are too many options - it would just be nice when there where examples for the usual cases (*1*): - Install packages and all packages they depend on from source rpms - Install packages and all packages they depend on from binary rpms - Upgrade all installed packages from source rpms when necessary - Unconditionally upgrade all installed packages from source rpms - Upgrade specific packages from source rpms when necessary - Unconditionally upgrade specific packages from source rpms (*2*) - Upgrade all installed packages from binary rpms when necessary - Unconditionally upgrade all installed packages from binary rpms - Upgrade specific packages from binary rpms when necessary - Unconditionally upgrade specific packages from binary rpms Are all those cases supported ? Are there other important/supported cases ? What are the recommended (openpkg) commands for the supported cases ? It is also _extremly_ important to _define_(*3*) what effect --force has on configurations. From my observation it does _not_ clobber existing and modified configs. Well, but one has to get the .specs right in the first place. E.g. httpd.conf et al are not flagged as config files in the apache2 package - and are consequently replaced by an upgrade. D'oh ! I have machines with up to 240 installed packages - i really do not want to check each and every configuration after a "minor" upgrade. > > But when i try this with binary packages > > openpkg build -p <platform> > > -r ftp://bla/.../RPM/PKG > > -f ftp://bla/.../RPM/PKG/00INDEX.rdf.bz2 > > -i -g -u > > I get > > FATAL: cannot find source for 'openssl' > > > If your command listing above is complete it looks like you forgot to > create a new index. It works, when i leave out the "-u", so i do a "rm $opkg_root/RPM/PKG/*; openpkg build ..." Perhaps someone could tell whether and how yum or apt can improve things ? What about the "usual cases" above ? I'd like to get the basics straight, first, so i try to concentrate on openpkg-tool - before i completely loose the ground. I had to stop to look at apt or yum for now. I wanted to slowly adapt OpenPKG, but the staccato of needed security updates in the last time "forced" me to use OpenPKG more seriously and in more important places. I really do no longer want to waste my time with the /usr/local morass. But i'm also not completely satisfied with my current setup - it is much better than before (*4*), but still not "defined" and "automatic" enough. (mk) (*1*) I'm under the impression anyways, that more and more often such valuable sections like "SEE ALSO" and "EXAMPLES" are left out from manual pages. Not spoken of completely left out man pages or man pages with just a reference to some html/info "dung" - that's really bullshit. Not that i do not appreciate additional or "in deep" informations, but usable man pages must be there, _first_. (*2*) Well, "unconditionally" here means: force a rebuild of only the named packages and also force a rebuild of all packages that depend on one or more of the rebuilt packages. (*3*) http://www.mail-archive.com/openpkg-dev%40openpkg.org/msg09886.html (*4*) Even the development of local or locally modified packages is much more fun with the OpenPkg/rpm environment, because it is much easier to reproduce results. -- Matthias Kurz; Fuldastr. 3; D-28199 Bremen; VOICE +49 421 53 600 47 >> Im prämotorischen Cortex kann jeder ein Held sein. (bdw) << ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
