Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: RPMs built for Mandrake

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RPMs built for Mandrake
Date: 2000-08-01 16:19:07
Message-ID: 3986F87B.F8929859@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> >   ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/binary/Mandrake/
> > The Mandrake/ directory will move to /pub/binary/v7.0.2/Mandrake once
> > the permissions are fixed up: Lamar, can you please adjust the group
> > permissions to allow pgsql to write into those directories (and to move
> > around files, just in case)? Should we adjust the names on the
> > directories from RPM and redhat-RPM to "redhat" only (or "RedHat" or ??)
> > to get some symmetry with the other distros?
> Well, what I had in mind was have a unified RPM tree, single SRPM, with
> multiple binary RPM trees.  So, since someone else has fixed the group
> perms on that tree already (thanks Jeff or Marc), pop the Mandrake
> binary RPMs into pub/binary/v7.0.2/RPM/RPMS/mandrake-7.x (the dir is
> already created).

Oh. Since there was already an RPM->redhat-RPM, it was pretty clear that
we would be segregating the RPM files. Will rearrange asap.

> If there had been departures from the main RPMset source RPM, then we
> would need the source RPM as well uploaded -- but, as long as the build
> is simply a rpm --rebuild (or equivalent), then there's no need to use
> the space for an essentially identical file.
> If you want to follow Mandrake naming conventions (-2mdk) that's fine,
> but not necessary as being in the 'mandrake-7.x' dir should set them
> apart.

That would seem to be problematic, since it would be difficult to tell
them apart outside the context of the Postgres ftp site. Don't know how
to assign a different version for different vendors within the RPM,
though I've gotten hints from your communications that it would be
possible. Also...

> As a matter of necessity, you will be needing to upgrade to RPM 3.0.5 to
> do any RPM building from these src RPMs in the future, more than
> likely.

Hmm. So we are forcing an "RPM fork"? I'm running rpm-3.0.4 on a
Mandrake machine, and your current 7.0.2-2 rpms build just fine. What
new features are we getting with the update? Can an rpm built with 3.0.5
be installed with a previous version of rpm (I would assume so, but just
checking...)?

It seems like we will need to carry along two versions of the RPMs for a
while, since RedHat is pushing for new, incompatible versions of these
builds on *their* release cycle (though perhaps Mandrake is up the curve
on this; don't know myself).

                         - Thomas

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Kovacs Zoltan SandorDate: 2000-08-01 16:26:55
Subject: pg_dump and pg_restore, speed
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 16:10:49
Subject: Re: pg_dump and pg_restore, speed

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group