This looks GREAT!! A couple of points: *) Python 2.2.x ?? This is scheduled for Zope 3 ?? Is there any way this could find its way in to a 2.x release? *) Byte compiling: Why not schedule an 'at' job to do the byte compile? *) Ownership/perms on the 'var' dir, this will need to be the same as the user Zope runs as, which I assume is not the same as ${zopeuser}
Minor personal request: *) Is there any way to detect if apache is installed, and have zope run as the apache user? This would be great for CGI support, etc. Adrian... -- Adrian Hungate EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.haqa.co.uk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris McDonough" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2002 11:28 PM Subject: [Zope-dev] Zope RPMs/debs and Linux FHS > Hi all, > > I am working towards a unified Zope configuration and installation > system on a branch of Zope named the 'chrism-install-branch'. > > I have given the buildout process on that branch the ability to create > an RPM distribution of Zope. I intend later to give the buildout > process the ability to create Debian .debs as well and maybe Solaris > packages... I am doing this with the expectation that we might be able > to provide RPM and .deb distros of Zope from zope.org instead of our > current "generic Linux as tarball" distro. I haven't looked yet at the > Debian packaging of Zope (by Gregor Hoffleit), but I intend to do that > next to get some more ideas. > > I know there are already at least two flavors of Zope RPMs which Jeff > Rush helped to package. There are a number of differences between the > packaging of the RPMs generated by my branch and the packaging of Jeff's > RPMs: > > - One of Jeff's distros breaks Zope up into many different packages, > while another installs it as one or two. Mine only has one > distribution flavor: a single package. > > - Jeff's puts some stuff into the current prevailing python's > site-packages directory and some other stuff into /usr/share/zope. > Mine puts nothing into site-packages, and installs all Zope software > into /opt/zope. > > - Jeff's creates an INSTANCE_HOME in /var/zope. Mine creates an > INSTANCE_HOME in /var/opt/zope. I don't know if this is the right > thing but in reading the Linux FHS, it advises to not create > subdirectories of var directly... so I don't. > > - Jeff's puts pid files into /var/run, while mine creates pid files > directly in INSTANCE_HOME/var. > > - Jeff's puts log files into /var/log while mine puts them into > INSTANCE_HOME/var. > > I am wondering if: > > - anybody has opinions on the packaging layout. Why is it advantageous > to have many packages rather than one? > > - anybody has any opinions of where Zope files distributed via RPMs and > debs should really go, especially wrt to the Linux FHS. I'm not sure > there is a right answer, but I don't know beans about this, so I > figure I'll ask. A file named 'Zope.spec.in' is attached to this > email which is the input file to create a Zope RPM spec file during > the make process, to give a better idea of how this works. > > Thanks! > > - C > > _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )