RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Info needed - Packages vs compiling on production

From: Sriram Narayanan <sriram@belenix.org>
Date: Mon 21 Feb 2011 - 19:16:59 CET
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=jN8-SjpbHyYUwACYAn-t8OB7xQkJSrFSRS7u0@mail.gmail.com>
Hi everyone:

I'm asking this question here since there are many distribution
builders on this list.

I'm having a discussion with some colleagues about the merits of
installing native libraries via a package manager than by compiling
source on production.

Compiling source on production is how most Ruby application developers
deploy rubygems having native bindings onto production servers.

My reasoning for using package managers includes the following:
- the various benefits listed at wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system)
- dependency resolution
- file verification (e.g. rpm -V)
- roll forward - roll back - to the extent possible by various package managers

My reasoning against compiling on production:
- doesn't help resolve dependency hell when you start to upgrade
libraries partly (when A depends on J1 and B1, while B1 depends on
J2). A package manager would tell you very quickly when you run into
such situations.
- There's some message somewhere about installing only the bare
minimum files onto a production server. Compilers and Devel files are
not required on production.

Have such topics been discussed somewhere ? Have you faced such
questions from your end users or in life ?

-- Sriram
==================
Belenix: www.belenix.org
Received on Mon Feb 21 19:23:52 2011
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.