RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Re: rpm on OSX Lion

From: Jeffrey Johnson <n3npq@me.com>
Date: Sat 24 Mar 2012 - 15:12:46 CET
Message-id: <46BFB0C2-5BCA-48DE-BEBF-B59F41F7DC45@me.com>

On Mar 24, 2012, at 9:12 AM, Henri Gomez wrote:

> Excellent.
> 
> I now well Jenkins but not Waterfall, seems interesting.
> 

Jenkins is spiffy, buildbot -- particularly with older python-2.4 --
is a bit of wrestling match.

I set up both on the same machine. Jenkins/Hudson needed
500 Mb and filled /var/log within a week with useless messages.

Buildbot is lighter weight and sooner or later one figures
out the double half nelson hammerlock to pin buildbot in
the wrestling match of CI.

>> I build the latest rpm-5_4 from CVS on Lion Server using a buildbot here:
>>        http://harwich.jbj.org:8010/waterfall
>> 
>> Both Lion Server (and Leopard) are there in the waterfalls.
>> 
>> (aside)
>> Both are broken atm just because I haven't bothered fixing "bleeding edge" functionality
>> on Mac OS X quite yet.
>> 
>> Note that "bleeding edge" is currently attempting to use an embedded
>> perl interpreter to load a perl-URPM CPAN module that isn't installed.
>> i.e. no one but me needs/uses this RPM functionality yet.
>> 
>> But there are older successful logs which show the build options in
>> use and the results of buildbot testing on both Lion and Leopard
>> (and if you want Snow Leopard or Mountain Lion, I can likely
>> attempt that too).
>> 
>> The majority of the packages in use are bog standard installs from
>> MacPorts port(1). There's a few packages (like db-5.3.15) that aren't in MacPorts
>> yet that I build manually.
>> 
>> The really hard part of building RPM is figuring out the build options.
>> Its not as simple as just doing
>>        ./configure --prefix=/opt/local
>>        make
>>        make install
>> 
>> But feel free to make suggestions on what you want to see. I'd love
>> to see RPM in use on Mac OS X.
> 
> My goal was to bring RPM natively to OSX and see if it would be
> possible to set a RPM distribution like one available from MacPorts or
> Brew but without requiring to build it.
> 

You want a full distro on Mac OS X based on RPM? Count me in 

> I tried to build various versions of rpm but they required beecrypt and popt.

Yes: neither bee crypt nor popt is optional. Both are distributed with
RPM "batteries included".

> My Lion machine is using 64bits kernel and I can't succeed build
> beecrypt in universal mode (32/64 bits) ;(
> 

Beecrypt ends up in -lrpmmisc if building
	--with-beecrypt=internal

> So I'd like to avoid requiring MacPorts but it seems we need many
> bootstrap libraries like popt/beecrypt (and in Universal Format).

Only if you choose to build against external libraries. E.g. Berkeley DB
can be built and distributed with RPM as well. In fact that is what I
would do if the decision was mine: writing AutoFu tests for all possible
versions of Berkeley DB is much harder than just bundling Berkeley DB
within RPM (as was done for years).

What is involved with "Universal Format" for you?

73 de Jeff

> ______________________________________________________________________
> RPM Package Manager                                    http://rpm5.org
> User Communication List                             rpm-users@rpm5.org
Received on Sat Mar 24 15:12:51 2012
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.