RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
Not to restart this whole thing again, but has anyone noticed the yasop project? Noticed it on freshmeat a moment ago. yasop (Yet Another SOftware Packager) is a script to convert tarballs into (binary) rpms. Reading everyone's responses on this subject, I think many were in agreement that installing tarballs are a Bad Thing(tm) on an RPM-based distribution: - It kills dependencies - Can overwrite files/packages without anyone knowing - No easy uninstall mechanism - Etc. I think that converting a tarball to an RPM is a Good Thing(tm)(although, maybe not the Best Thing(tm)), and a tool like this (if implemented properly) looks like a good answer to all of the above problems. I personally don't have the time, nor the use, for such a program, but for those that might, and feel like commenting on this or other available tools, I'd be interested in hearing your feedback. Don't you wish everything came with a distribution neutral spec file? Don Head Linux Mentor Wave Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [AIM - Don Wave][ICQ - 18804935] [IRC - EFnet, #WaveTech, Don-Wave]
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
--- Linux Frog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 May 2000, you wrote:
> > AppDrake or InstallDrake
> >
> > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc.
> uncompress it into a temp
> > directory, run through the ./configure, make and
> make install, or
> > alternatively running an install.sh or other
> script. even for those of us
> > who have no problem installing software, this
> would seem like a Good Thing.
> >
>
> I think it's a good idea. I believe what you're
> looking for is similar to a
> windows *.exe installation program of sorts. Maybe
> a shell program that you
> can run and import tarballs to install?
Well, I thin kit is a >>>Very Bad<<< idea to blindly
run the whole "./configure;make;make install" as
***root***! That is the whole point of having the RPM
system, so you can file/package/version control.
It would be ok to do the build part of it
("./configure;make"), but if you run the install, you
will most likely need root priviledges, and who knows
what RPM registered files the script overwrites, or
what other things it may do. This might be a good
portal for Linux viruses. Tarballs should only be used
in an RPM system when the software is not available in
RPM format, and only through manual install.
I don't see the point of such a tool. If it is to give
newbie users the power to install tarball, then it is
completely wrong, since newbies should only be
installing RPM packages compatible with their distro.
If they don't feel confortable manually unpacking and
installing a tarball, then why should they be given
the power to do it automatically as root!
=
Eugenio Diaz, BSEE/BSCE
Linux Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Geoffrey Lee wrote:
> >
> > - Yes, but imagine a huge package ( let say netscape )
> > which has so much files, scripts. etc ...
> > it could be impossible to parse the configs setup!
> >
> >
>
>
> netscape only comes in binary, you see.
>
So? :-)
Here is an example Makefile for netscape.
# New ports collection makefile for:netscape (full communicator
version)
# Date created: 24 Feb 1997
# Whom: ache
#
# $FreeBSD: ports/www/netscape4-communicator/Makefile,v 1.68 2000/05/13
16:19:21
sada Exp $
#
PORTNAME?= netscape-${BROWSER_ARC}
PORTVERSION?= ${BROWSER_VER}
CATEGORIES?=www
MASTER_SITES?=
ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/communicator/4.08/english/unix/unsupp
orted/freebsd/professional_edition/
DISTFILES?= communicator-v408-export.x86-unknown-freebsd.tar.gz
MAINTAINER?=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RUN_DEPENDS+= netscape:${PORTSDIR}/www/netscape-wrapper
Y2K=http://home.netscape.com/products/year2000/faq/client.html
.if !defined(INFILE_HEAD)
# not included from master ports
NO_LATEST_LINK= yes
.endif
USE_XLIB= yes
NO_BUILD= yes
NO_FILTER_SHLIBS= yes
STRIP=
WRKSRC?=${WRKDIR}/${BROWSER}-v408.x86-unknown-freebsd
PKGDIR= ${.CURDIR}/pkg
AUTOADMIN?= autoadmin-v408.x86-unknown-freebsd.tar.gz
BROWSER?= communicator
BROWSER_ARC?= ${BROWSER}
BROWSER_VER?= 4.08
FORTIFY=Fortify-1.4.6-unix-x86
NDIR= ${PREFIX}/${NSUBDIR}
NSUBDIR?= lib/netscape
BINDIR= ${PREFIX}/bin
INFILE_HEAD?= 'Communicator,4.08.0.98306'
WRAPPER_TEMPLATE= ${MASTERDIR}/files/netscape.sh
MAILCAP?= ${MASTERDIR}/files/mailcap
PLIST_SUB= BROWSER=${BROWSER_ARC} BROWSER_VER=${BROWSER_VER} \
NSUBDIR=${NSUBDIR}
.if (${BROWSER} == "communicator") && !defined(NO_AUTOADMIN)
DISTFILES+= ${AUTOADMIN}
.endif
.if defined(WITH_128BIT) && !defined(NO_FORTIFY)
MASTER_SITES+= ftp://ftp.fortify.net/pub/Fortify/ \
ftp://ftp.za.freebsd.org/pub/Fortify/
DISTFILES+= ${FORTIFY}.tar.gz
RESTRICTED= "Contains strong cryptography"
.endif
.if !defined(_PREMKINCLUDED)
.include
.endif
.if (${ARCH} == "i386") && !defined(USE_LINUX_LIB) &&
!defined(WITHOUT_AOUT)
USE_AOUT_LIB= yes
PKGREQ= ${MASTERDIR}/pkg/REQ.aout
RUN_DEPENDS+=
${X11BASE}/lib/aout/libX11.so.6.1:${PORTSDIR}/x11/XFree86-aoutli
bs
.endif
.SILENT:
.if !defined(WITH_128BIT) && !defined(NO_FORTIFY)
pre-extract:
${ECHO} "You can make Netscape use 128-bit encryption by defining
WITH_1
28BIT"
.endif
post-configure:
${SED} -e "s;@PREFIX@;${PREFIX};g" -e "s;@NSUBDIR@;${NSUBDIR};g"
\
-e "s;@BROWSER@;${BROWSER_ARC};g" \
-e "s;@BROWSER_VER@;${BROWSER_VER};g" \
${WRAPPER_TEMPLATE} >${WRKSRC}/netscape
${CHMOD} +x ${WRKSRC}/netscape
${ECHO} -n ${INFILE_HEAD},${NDIR} >${WRKSRC}/infile
.if defined(USE_AOUT_LIB)
pre-install:
PKG_PREFIX=${PREFIX} ${SH} ${PKGREQ} ${PKGNAME} INSTALL
.endif
do-install:
${MKDIR} ${NDIR}/java/classes
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/*.jar ${NDIR}/java/classes
${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/vreg ${NDIR}
for i in ${WRKSRC}/*.nif; do \
${EXTRACT_CMD} ${EXTRACT_BEFORE_ARGS} $${i}
${EXTRACT_AFTER_ARGS
} -C ${NDIR}; \
done
${WRKSRC}/vreg ${NDIR}/registry ${WRKSRC}/infile
${MV} -f ${NDIR}/netscape
${NDIR}/${BROWSER_ARC}-${BROWSER_VER}.bin
${INSTALL_SCRIPT} ${WRKSRC}/netscape \
${BINDIR}/${BROWSER_ARC}-${BROWSER_VER}
${LN} -sf ${BROWSER_ARC}-${BROWSER_VER} ${BINDIR}/${BROWSER_ARC}-4
${LN} -sf ${BROWSER_ARC}-4 ${BINDIR}/netscape.run
if [ ! -f ${NDIR}/mailcap ] ; then \
${INSTALL_DATA} ${MAILCAP} ${NDIR}; \
fi
${RM} -rf ${NDIR}/movemail-src
.if (${BROWSER} == "communicator") && !defined(NO_AUTOADMIN)
tar zxf ${DISTDIR}/${AUTOADMIN} -C ${NDIR}
.endif
.if defined(WITH_128BIT) && !defined(NO_FORTIFY)
cd ${WRKDIR}/${FORTIFY} \
&& (${ECHO}; ${ECHO} yes; ${ECHO} no; ${ECHO} no) \
| ./Fortify.sh ${NDIR}/${BROWSER_ARC}-${BROWSER_VER}.bin
.endif
${CHOWN} -R root:wheel ${NDIR}
post-install:
${CAT} ${PKGDIR}/DESCR
# hack to allow slave ports to include bsd.port.pre.mk and then this file
.if defined(_PREMKINCLUDED)
.include
.else
.include
.endif
--
Stuart Krivis[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fourth law of programming:
Anything that can go wrong wi
sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
On Mon, 22 May 2000, Alex Hayes wrote: > > mostly due to my experience over at linuxnewbie.org, where many questions > are "i've downloaded __.tar.gz, now what do i do to install?" > It's almost impossible to write a generic front end for this. How would you handle dependencies? Conflicts with already installed versions of things? The BSD ports system handles this on a "tarball by tarball" basis. Someone figures out what needs to be done to install Software X in FreeBSD. Then they write a front end script for it. You cd /usr/ports/x11/kde2 make install The required source tarballs are then fetched for you, untarred/gzed/bzed/etc, needed patches applied... ./configure is run, then compiled and installed. Dependencies are handled as needed too. The packages that kde depends upon also have their own Makefiles in the ports tree, so it switches there, works on foo, then returns to kde. FreeBSD is really a source distribution, where rpm- and deb-based Linux distros are binary distributions. Then we get into cvsup, make world, etc... :-) But that's off-topic. hehe -- Stuart Krivis[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
what do you thing of this? It's a 5 minutes-made glade screenshot. The tree and the list are unfilled, so there are hidden, but should be there. The idea is to try to autodetect src, makefile, configure and other stuff location, and try to parse Makefile to find out what the install process is. But the user can change all this. The application provide a tree to find easier xhere are files, and a text editor to find out how to install. reactions? dam's Serge Lussier a écrit : > Geoffrey Lee wrote: > > > > > netscape only comes in binary, you see. > > I give up Hahaha! > > > > > > > > no,no,no > > > I just wanted to suggest to give the choice of an alternative > > > installer/uninstaller for non existant RPM-built sources, > > > or if I prefer not to go RPM way for that specific software ... > > > > the biggest problem is that because of all the different way the Makefile > > behaves it's realy hard to make okne which can work for ALL packages, plsu > > some packages don't run through configure e.g. documentation. i can make one > > which should work for almost anything, but not all. e.g. samba puts its > > configure in the source directory. > > > > so you would have to untar the source , and tehn cd to samba-2.0.7, and then > > cd to source, and then run ./configure .. > > > > > > Samba: How I could be screwed up if I can't find the way it works. > I then have to dig and find the doc about how to proceed ... > Thus, the utility could interactively let me search within the source tree > where is the procedure's doc and then fill the informations the utility need to > proceed. > If it is not that complicated, then this utility is worth it. > > It is then easy to start to catch & parse the stdout and sterr > to get some error msg, file installation and location etc ... > > Ok, let say that the utility is also screwed 'cause that package is so much > "non-standard". > Then I 'll wait for or try to find the RPM... > hehehe > > Thank you for your informations Geoffrey. > > I don't want to be annoying. > I think I told enough about this topic. > > Regards, > Serge Lussier
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
On Mon, 22 May 2000, Alex Hayes wrote: > AppDrake or InstallDrake > > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc. uncompress it into a temp > directory, run through the ./configure, make and make install, or > alternatively running an install.sh or other script. even for those of us > who have no problem installing software, this would seem like a Good Thing. You're basically describing the FreeBSD ports system, although it is accessed by "make," instead of a new utility. -- Stuart Krivis[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
Geoffrey Lee wrote: > > netscape only comes in binary, you see. I give up Hahaha! > > > > no,no,no > > I just wanted to suggest to give the choice of an alternative > > installer/uninstaller for non existant RPM-built sources, > > or if I prefer not to go RPM way for that specific software ... > > the biggest problem is that because of all the different way the Makefile > behaves it's realy hard to make okne which can work for ALL packages, plsu > some packages don't run through configure e.g. documentation. i can make one > which should work for almost anything, but not all. e.g. samba puts its > configure in the source directory. > > so you would have to untar the source , and tehn cd to samba-2.0.7, and then > cd to source, and then run ./configure .. > > Samba: How I could be screwed up if I can't find the way it works. I then have to dig and find the doc about how to proceed ... Thus, the utility could interactively let me search within the source tree where is the procedure's doc and then fill the informations the utility need to proceed. If it is not that complicated, then this utility is worth it. It is then easy to start to catch & parse the stdout and sterr to get some error msg, file installation and location etc ... Ok, let say that the utility is also screwed 'cause that package is so much "non-standard". Then I 'll wait for or try to find the RPM... hehehe Thank you for your informations Geoffrey. I don't want to be annoying. I think I told enough about this topic. Regards, Serge Lussier
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> >
> > rpm builder has been hacked heavily ... prob need some ppl to
> test for me.
>
> Ok then,
> Let say that its a bit complicated and there is
> already a work making its way...
>
> However, It seems to be an interresting point :-)
> I am sure something could be done.
>
yop
> For myself:
> All this mean that right now I better start to learn how to make
> RPM packages if I want to contribute :-)))
>
> Yes, I agree about RPMs way.
>
the mdk rpmhowto is a little outdated now, hopefully a new one will be out
soon :)
> Civilem says:
>
> > I think it is a safe bet to say that there is almost always a
> > file in the package called info or readme or install which can be
> > parsed for package-specific instructions. Perl or Python have
> > some ready-written parsers which should usually(tm) be able to
> > extract the install instructions and standardize the language so
> > that a routine could pick them up and perform the amazing feats
> > of legerdermain required to make an install.
>
> ("legerdermain" ?)
>
> - Yes, but imagine a huge package ( let say netscape )
> which has so much files, scripts. etc ...
> it could be impossible to parse the configs setup!
>
>
netscape only comes in binary, you see.
> no,no,no
> I just wanted to suggest to give the choice of an alternative
> installer/uninstaller for non existant RPM-built sources,
> or if I prefer not to go RPM way for that specific software ...
the biggest problem is that because of all the different way the Makefile
behaves it's realy hard to make okne which can work for ALL packages, plsu
some packages don't run through configure e.g. documentation. i can make one
which should work for almost anything, but not all. e.g. samba puts its
configure in the source directory.
so you would have to untar the source , and tehn cd to samba-2.0.7, and then
cd to source, and then run ./configure ..
> FREEDOM
>
>
> Finally,
> I apologize to have started this topic.
>
> Serge Lussier.
>
> thanx.
>
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
Geoffrey Lee wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> >
> >
> > I think a utility that would ./configure , make , build rpm,
> > install rpm, is
> > what is needed, that way you can more easily uninstall the
> > program and check
> > dependencies of other programs that might need this program.
> >
> >
>
> i see. but they weren't talking about rpm, just run ./configure make and
> make install. this is not a good idea ..given the packaging methiod is rpm
> for mandrake. i misunderstood their message, that's why i made all the
> references about rpm in the msg.
>
> as i said: i'm hacking rpm builder right now. it seems to work ...there's a
> version up in contrib , 3mdk, but it's a little borken becuase hte origianl
> one didn't have buildroot, and i didn't add it in my patch. i've got an
> updaeted patch (4mdk) here on my hard drive, just waiting for lenny to
> update it. right now my patch is ok, it can bulid a generic spec, with
> description, etc, file list .(it even autogenerates a changelog!!) it's ok
> to build stuff as non-root, etc. really schweet. i'm kind of trying to bring
> the stuff to mandrake compliance because
>
> (1) i once had a desire to build some kind of program that could make rpms
> from source but i'm too lazy to do so
> (2) rpmbuiler is easy to hack because it's tcl
>
> rpm builder has been hacked heavily ... prob need some ppl to test for me.
Ok then,
Let say that its a bit complicated and there is
already a work making its way...
However, It seems to be an interresting point :-)
I am sure something could be done.
For myself:
All this mean that right now I better start to learn how to make
RPM packages if I want to contribute :-)))
Yes, I agree about RPMs way.
Civilem says:
> I think it is a safe bet to say that there is almost always a
> file in the package called info or readme or install which can be
> parsed for package-specific instructions. Perl or Python have
> some ready-written parsers which should usually(tm) be able to
> extract the install instructions and standardize the language so
> that a routine could pick them up and perform the amazing feats
> of legerdermain required to make an install.
("legerdermain" ?)
- Yes, but imagine a huge package ( let say netscape )
which has so much files, scripts. etc ...
it could be impossible to parse the configs setup!
no,no,no
I just wanted to suggest to give the choice of an alternative
installer/uninstaller for non existant RPM-built sources,
or if I prefer not to go RPM way for that specific software ...
FREEDOM
Finally,
I apologize to have started this topic.
Serge Lussier.
thanx.
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
yes, installshield type of program. i know this is not 100% poss. at this stage due to the variety of installation procedures. i suppose the program's scope could be expanded to incorporate the ability to install .tar's (&.tar.gz), .rpm's, .deb's and .tgz's, or it could serve as a wrapper for either a seperate procedure or a call to rpmdrake for rpms and other utils for other packages. i was not really going for a package manager however, more just a "linux app installer for dummies". mostly due to my experience over at linuxnewbie.org, where many questions are "i've downloaded __.tar.gz, now what do i do to install?" Original Message Follows From: Linux Frog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 21:48:35 -0400 On Mon, 22 May 2000, you wrote: > AppDrake or InstallDrake > > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc. uncompress it into a temp > directory, run through the ./configure, make and make install, or > alternatively running an install.sh or other script. even for those of us > who have no problem installing software, this would seem like a Good Thing. > I think it's a good idea. I believe what you're looking for is similar to a windows *.exe installation program of sorts. Maybe a shell program that you can run and import tarballs to install? Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> Subject: Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > I think a utility that would ./configure , make , build rpm, > install rpm, is > what is needed, that way you can more easily uninstall the > program and check > dependencies of other programs that might need this program. > > i see. but they weren't talking about rpm, just run ./configure make and make install. this is not a good idea ..given the packaging methiod is rpm for mandrake. i misunderstood their message, that's why i made all the references about rpm in the msg. as i said: i'm hacking rpm builder right now. it seems to work ...there's a version up in contrib , 3mdk, but it's a little borken becuase hte origianl one didn't have buildroot, and i didn't add it in my patch. i've got an updaeted patch (4mdk) here on my hard drive, just waiting for lenny to update it. right now my patch is ok, it can bulid a generic spec, with description, etc, file list .(it even autogenerates a changelog!!) it's ok to build stuff as non-root, etc. really schweet. i'm kind of trying to bring the stuff to mandrake compliance because (1) i once had a desire to build some kind of program that could make rpms from source but i'm too lazy to do so (2) rpmbuiler is easy to hack because it's tcl rpm builder has been hacked heavily ... prob need some ppl to test for me. > > Serge Lussier wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > From: Geoffrey Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:47 PM > > Subject: RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > > > > > > > - My opinion - Its a very good idea! > > > > > > > > There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this > sequences of > > > > building: ./configure; make; make install > > > > and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you do NOT need to be root to build RPMs, it is a _very_ bad > idea, unless > > > you need to create something which oes need root, e.g. mknod > > > > > Strange ... > > You are talking about RPMs, I was talking about tgz source > tarballs ... uh? > > wtf is that ? > > > > I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about > > or you don't care about the idea... > > Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? > > > > Regards, > > Serge Lussier >
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
Serge Lussier wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: Geoffrey Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about > or you don't care about the idea... > Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? > > Regards, > Serge Lussier Well, to fork the whole thing, there was once the zenguin project which was to do source tarballs and source rpms and binaries of both. The project leader got hired by someone and so went the project. I think it is a safe bet to say that there is almost always a file in the package called info or readme or install which can be parsed for package-specific instructions. Perl or Python have some ready-written parsers which should usually(tm) be able to extract the install instructions and standardize the language so that a routine could pick them up and perform the amazing feats of legerdermain required to make an install. On the other end--a post-install routine should(tm) be able to pick up and associate the executables with the files it normally deals with, and perhaps create a desktop icon or two for the WMs installed on the machine. And Yes, I will help. I can code in Python reasonably well if that is appropriate. Civileme
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> >I think a utility that would ./configure , make , build rpm, install rpm, >is >what is needed, that way you can more easily uninstall the program and >check >dependencies of other programs that might need this program. > Yes I agree. Sticking to the one package format is the best option. > >Serge Lussier wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > From: Geoffrey Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:47 PM > > Subject: RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > > > > > > > - My opinion - Its a very good idea! > > > > > > > > There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this >sequences of > > > > building: ./configure; make; make install > > > > and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you do NOT need to be root to build RPMs, it is a _very_ bad idea, >unless > > > you need to create something which oes need root, e.g. mknod > > > > > Strange ... > > You are talking about RPMs, I was talking about tgz source tarballs ... >uh? > > wtf is that ? > > > > I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about > > or you don't care about the idea... > > Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? > > > > Regards, > > Serge Lussier > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
I think a utility that would ./configure , make , build rpm, install rpm, is what is needed, that way you can more easily uninstall the program and check dependencies of other programs that might need this program. Serge Lussier wrote: > - Original Message - > From: Geoffrey Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:47 PM > Subject: RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > > > > - My opinion - Its a very good idea! > > > > > > There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this sequences of > > > building: ./configure; make; make install > > > and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. > > > > > > > > > > > you do NOT need to be root to build RPMs, it is a _very_ bad idea, unless > > you need to create something which oes need root, e.g. mknod > > > Strange ... > You are talking about RPMs, I was talking about tgz source tarballs ... uh? > wtf is that ? > > I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about > or you don't care about the idea... > Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? > > Regards, > Serge Lussier
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
On Mon, 22 May 2000, you wrote: > AppDrake or InstallDrake > > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc. uncompress it into a temp > directory, run through the ./configure, make and make install, or > alternatively running an install.sh or other script. even for those of us > who have no problem installing software, this would seem like a Good Thing. > I think it's a good idea. I believe what you're looking for is similar to a windows *.exe installation program of sorts. Maybe a shell program that you can run and import tarballs to install?
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> > e.g. mknod > > > Strange ... > You are talking about RPMs, I was talking about tgz source > tarballs ... uh? > wtf is that ? > > I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about > or you don't care about the idea... > Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? > oh i see. you want it to run through ./configure make and make install. right ? umm, but i'm not sure hwo useful that would be to mandrake, given that the packaging is rpm, not tar.gz. anyway, i doubt that you acutally need a program for this ... just copy the source to /usr/src, and then do zcat source.tar.gz | tar -xf - and then cd to the source and run ./configure ; make; make install! you don't need a kde app for this ...or X ...bash will be enough. > Regards, > Serge Lussier > > >
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
- Original Message - From: Geoffrey Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:47 PM Subject: RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > - My opinion - Its a very good idea! > > > > There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this sequences of > > building: ./configure; make; make install > > and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. > > > > > > you do NOT need to be root to build RPMs, it is a _very_ bad idea, unless > you need to create something which oes need root, e.g. mknod > Strange ... You are talking about RPMs, I was talking about tgz source tarballs ... uh? wtf is that ? I think you don't really understand what Alex was talking about or you don't care about the idea... Is your reply only to tell that it's not a good idea or what ? Regards, Serge Lussier
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> - My opinion - Its a very good idea! > > There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this sequences of > building: ./configure; make; make install > and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. > you do NOT need to be root to build RPMs, it is a _very_ bad idea, unless you need to create something which oes need root, e.g. mknod > Since I am not a script coder, I however, do know well C/C++. > > For the ones who are interrested: > > I am willing to start a gui frontend ( a KDE app ) . > I could start the project at sourceforge.net or wherever, > start the code with Kdevelop and testing. > But I cannot do it all by myself due to > some little lacks of Linux and KDE programing knowledges. > > I will need support for: > - CVS Project management > - KDE apps configuration API ( I am lost ) >on how to save/retreive application's context > - Selecting which data to keep and how to save: files, dirs etc... > - Detecting user's/Xwindows privileges ( root ? ) > - Uninstall - how to remove dependant custom/added libs > - What else ? > > ah i would prefer it to be gtk :) no, you don't need to be root to build most things. not sure if you are familiar with RPm, but you can use a .rpmmacros in your home directory and define your _topdir to soemthing like /home/user/rpm and you're done. as i said for things that contain character devices, you need root privileges. and i still prefer to build my kernel with root ... i think that you can do file parsing to make suer that you don't have any mknods in the spec and warn the user before building. > Here is what I am certainly capable: > - User interface ( gui ) - presentation. > - Catching and parsing stdout/stderr output from "configure/gcc/make" > - What else ? > > If any other is interrested and wants me to participate, let me know :-) > check out rpmlib, but i'm not sure how useful it is going to be. > I want to tell that it could be an other very good point for > Mandrake to have > something like this ( let say- "DrakeInstaller" like Alex said ). > Thanx i'm hacking rpm builder as a temporary solution for now ... it si almost done, i have already gotten a buildroot done and i think i'll upload a new one later on. > > > Alex Hayes wrote: > > >tres bien fait! > > > > Selon moi, voici ce que je pense des distributions "pour tous" de > Linux que > j'ai essayé: > > Mandrake: > Sans vouloir diminuer les autres distributions et selon mon > modeste degré de > connaissance > de Linux, je pense que Mandrake est la meilleur des distributions > en ce qui > attrait > à l'équilibre entre la quantité de packages (ni trops, ni pas assé) , > la qualité de la configuration et la qualité des programmes-maisons de > configuration. > Sans parler de l'interface de l'installation qui dépasse même MS-Windows! > > Corel Linux est une autre distrib digne de mention mais une fois > installée, > rien à faire pour enlever son propre lilo dans le MBR, autrement > que de départitioner le disque dur! Pire qu'un virus et Microsoft! > KDE amélioré ... > > > Caldera (2.2) ressemble à un Redhat brisé! > SuSE (6.1, 6.2) : Très difficile à configurer. >Avoir une bonne connaissance de Linux, >et quelques fois connaître la langue germaine :-))) > /etc est méconnaissable. > > Slackware: Je ne la reconnais plus depuis la version 4.0. > > voilà mon opinion. > > Serge Lussier > >
Re: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
Alex Hayes wrote: > AppDrake or InstallDrake > > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc. uncompress it into a temp > directory, run through the ./configure, make and make install, or > alternatively running an install.sh or other script. even for those of us > who have no problem installing software, this would seem like a Good Thing. > > i'm not a coder, so i can't implement this. perhaps there is someone Out > There who has put such a utlity together? > > on another note, 7.1 is up with kde beta and xfree 4.0, and staroffice, and > i am loving everything. default OS is now linux. you guys are kicking a$$. > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - My opinion - Its a very good idea! There is a point: Not all source package tarballs have this sequences of building: ./configure; make; make install and most of the time we need to be root for the install step. Since I am not a script coder, I however, do know well C/C++. For the ones who are interrested: I am willing to start a gui frontend ( a KDE app ) . I could start the project at sourceforge.net or wherever, start the code with Kdevelop and testing. But I cannot do it all by myself due to some little lacks of Linux and KDE programing knowledges. I will need support for: - CVS Project management - KDE apps configuration API ( I am lost ) on how to save/retreive application's context - Selecting which data to keep and how to save: files, dirs etc... - Detecting user's/Xwindows privileges ( root ? ) - Uninstall - how to remove dependant custom/added libs - What else ? Here is what I am certainly capable: - User interface ( gui ) - presentation. - Catching and parsing stdout/stderr output from "configure/gcc/make" - What else ? If any other is interrested and wants me to participate, let me know :-) I want to tell that it could be an other very good point for Mandrake to have something like this ( let say- "DrakeInstaller" like Alex said ). Thanx Alex Hayes wrote: >tres bien fait! > Selon moi, voici ce que je pense des distributions "pour tous" de Linux que j'ai essayé: Mandrake: Sans vouloir diminuer les autres distributions et selon mon modeste degré de connaissance de Linux, je pense que Mandrake est la meilleur des distributions en ce qui attrait à l'équilibre entre la quantité de packages (ni trops, ni pas assé) , la qualité de la configuration et la qualité des programmes-maisons de configuration. Sans parler de l'interface de l'installation qui dépasse même MS-Windows! Corel Linux est une autre distrib digne de mention mais une fois installée, rien à faire pour enlever son propre lilo dans le MBR, autrement que de départitioner le disque dur! Pire qu'un virus et Microsoft! KDE amélioré ... Caldera (2.2) ressemble à un Redhat brisé! SuSE (6.1, 6.2) : Très difficile à configurer. Avoir une bonne connaissance de Linux, et quelques fois connaître la langue germaine :-))) /etc est méconnaissable. Slackware: Je ne la reconnais plus depuis la version 4.0. voilà mon opinion. Serge Lussier
RE: [Cooker] Idea for new utility
> -Original Message- > From: Alex Hayes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 2:41 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Cooker] Idea for new utility > > > AppDrake or InstallDrake > > utility would take a .tar, .tar.gz, etc. uncompress it into a temp > directory, run through the ./configure, make and make install, or > alternatively running an install.sh or other script. even for > those of us > who have no problem installing software, this would seem like a > Good Thing. you can use rpmbuilder. i'm currently hacking on this to bring it into mandrake spec file compliance. it's not done yet, the one in cooker still needs a buildroot, the one on my harddrive does have it, i'm thinking of also doing a chnagelog it's a tcl (/usr/bin/wish) script, ...but i'm no tcl expert ...but i should know enough to get by. there's a certain difficulty here, because MOSTLY it means running ./configure --prefix=/usr, make and make prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr but it doen't always wokr because of how different Makefiles behave :-/ mandrake uses bzip2 for better compression :-) > > i'm not a coder, so i can't implement this. perhaps there is someone Out > There who has put such a utlity together? > > on another note, 7.1 is up with kde beta and xfree 4.0, and > staroffice, and > i am loving everything. default OS is now linux. you guys are > kicking a$$. > > tres bien fait! > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com >
