pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Source and binary packaging - future directions

To: markgw@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [pcp] Source and binary packaging - future directions
From: Max Matveev <makc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:57:50 +1100
Cc: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx, <edwardsg@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4990D52F.5060709@xxxxxxx>
References: <1233627045.5518.55.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <18825.23091.63084.898574@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1233742073.10265.1.camel@bozo> <1233786804.24330.15.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <498A6CD0.7010002@xxxxxxxxx> <18826.49390.974151.5980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1233876585.19028.19.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <18828.2923.770660.413637@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1233915475.4556.11.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4990D52F.5060709@xxxxxxx>
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:15:27 +1100, Mark Goodwin wrote:

 MG> Nathan Scott wrote:
 >> ps: Fedora10 has changed rpm options/syntax/configs/... &
 >> the pcp/pcp-gui Makepkgs is b0rked - any interest in having
 >> a look, Max?  You know this stuff better than anyone (Ken
 >> said you'd _really_ want to take a look... ;)

 MG> actually, it might have been me suggesting Max would have the
 MG> most clues for fixing this one :)

 MG> In any case, Greg Edwards @ SGI said this morning he will
 MG> take a look at it - some more rpm-macros massaging needed.
rpm in 4.6 decided to remove support for macrofiles in rpmrc file
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473341), they're suggesting
is to use --macros instead, but it does not work in 4.4.2 which is
shipped with SLES 10. I'm going to rework this stuff to use macros on
command line (we only need 6 or 7 of them) which should be independent
of all the shenanigans of rpm pixies.

I'm also thinking about removing support for rpm v2: if Nathan can
remove Irix stuff then removing old rpm cruft should be Ok too.

max

PS. Mark, can you ask cattelan to create me a public git directory on
    oss.sgi.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>