Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2000/03/27/17:35:55
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 00:23:08 +0200, you wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I would like to propose an alternative (or additional) installation
>> method for upcomming cygwin-releases.
>
>
>Wow, I really wish Cygnus will go the rpm way (at least until dpkg has
>been fixed/rewritten).
Me, too 8-)
>
>When I had to use Windows, I made an ugly port of rpm to make upgrading
>of our internal user packages managable, as well as packaging simple
>and uniform across GNU/Linux, GNU/Windows.
>
>How much effort was involved in porting rpm? I'm very much interested
>in your patches/reworked .spec files.
>
I spent quite a while on fixes & testing them. I am sure I have not
fixed all issues and have also used some dirty hacks (I am more a
pascal/python/sh fan than a c-programmer ;-) )
but rpm works fine for me now which means that building, packaging and
installation with dependency-checking works.
I will send the patches for rpm-3.0.4 to you in another mail in order
not to waste bandwith in this list here. I will also make the spec
files available for download as soon as I have finished my
cleanup-activities.
>Just two weeks ago, I've setup a cross-development environment to
>provide binaries for our Windows users; and again experienced the
>pain of missing a package manager that Cygnus people would use.
>So, I found myself writing a silly script to compile and setup the
>cross-development tools, and do the `untar, patch, configure, make,
>install, zip' sequence.
>
>Greetings,
>
>Jan.
Till soon,
Michael
- Raw text -