RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Re: Help: Installing RPM on Solaris 8

From: Jeff Johnson <n3npq@mac.com>
Date: Wed 09 Apr 2008 - 21:46:33 CEST
Message-Id: <1BAECA9D-EB77-4919-B236-B9C73B2AEDF2@mac.com>

On Apr 9, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Eliyahu Skoczylas wrote:

> First BIG question:
> Do you think I'm better off
> - starting over with 4.4.9 an Sun's cc, as you've done,
> - keep going with 5.0.3 but restart on cc,
> - or just to keep plugging with 5.0.3 on gcc?

The major difference is that rpm-4.4.9 built exactly one way, while
5.0.3 is considerably more flexible (at some complexity cost).

rpm-5.0.3 has been exposed to many more non-gcc compilers and
platforms than rpm-4.4.9 ever was as well.

You will likely have identical issues with identical build tools and  
whether using rpm-4.4.9 or rpm-5.0.3. The portability and non-gcc issues
are likelier to be solved in rpm-5.0.3 than 4.4.9.

> Background:
> We have a large Solaris code base being forked to Linux.  The Linux  
> team has no packaging tool yet, and part of the Solaris team has  
> been using Solaris packages, but most groups just use tarballs and  
> homegrown shell scripts.  I'm the one who has to select a tool for  
> everyone to converge on, then build some templates, write some  
> docs, and give some training to get everyone up to speed.
> Risk Analysis:
> I'm over schedule right now, and I need to give a report to my  
> manager tomorrow about which way we're going to go.  (Dropping RPM  
> is another option, but that entails a whole different set of risks.)
> 4.4.9 would best keep us in sync with the CentOS version 4.3.3 that  
> another team member has started playing with, and should be most  
> interoperable in terms of of .spec files.

Not true. There are already significant changes in rpm-4.4.9 that
are very different than rpm-4.3.3.

> 5.0.3 would position us for the future, but require upgrading the  
> Linux work, too, and building a tool suite for the Linux team as  
> well as the Solaris team.
> Continuing with gcc has no great advantage at present, but it might  
> help the Solaris team slowly switch over to gcc if they benefited  
> from new libraries and stuff that I have to build.  The guy running  
> the unified cmake project would like that, anyway. :)  And I can  
> sell it to my manager as reducing divergence across the OS fork in  
> the future.
> Going with cc would keep the Solaris people happy.
> So what do you think?

If you start reporting what the compilation issues actually are, then  
issues can likely be sorted out.

So far you've asked "Who is using rpm on Solaris?" and are now
asking "Which rpm (or none) should I use?"

The answers to those questions are harder than sorting out compilation
problems on Solaris.

73 de Jeff
Received on Wed Apr 9 21:47:02 2008
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.