pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: new build dependency

To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: new build dependency
From: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 16:19:49 +1000
Cc: PCP Mailing List <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <y0mk3njagjx.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
References: <51802791.8030603@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <y0mk3njagjx.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5
On 01/05/13 06:50, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
...
How do you mean by fix?  The RPM & DPKG builds are meant to simulate a
distributor's official builds, which would have the libmicrohttpd
stuff available.  One can't make those control files conditional on
the environment, otherwise the builds wouldn't be reproducible.

Understood.

But I need/want to run PCP QA on a whole range of older systems, which means I need to be able to build packages for them ... this has always been possible in the past, and I think should continue to be so.

With RPM, it is possible to pass conditionals from the rpm command
line (--with-FOO), which macros in the .spec can adapt to, and turn
features on or off.  I don't know whether DPKG can do that.  If so, we
could add such a knob, just for people who use these RPM/DPKG files as
non-distributors.

I suspect we're going to have to go down this path for the rpm packaging, at least for SuSE ... for dpkg I seem to be able to find packages.

I really don't want to try and build libmicrohttpd from source on half
a dozen (so far) machines.

(What OS do these run?)

So far I've come across:
openSUSE 12.1
openSUSE 12.2
SLES 11 SP1
CentOS 5.9 <- looks like I can get a RHEL 5 compatible RPM from epel, at least according to rpmfind.net.


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