Subject: RE: GNU-Win32 distribution question
From: [email-masked] (Edward Avis)

15 May 1998 16:51:54 -0700
Message-ID: <c=GB%a=TMAILUK%p=DCNET%l=[email-masked]>
To: "'Kevin F. Quinn'" <[email-masked]>,
        "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>

>1: Unpacking locations
>
>Source distributions are typically single trees installed in
>non-standard places exclusively (i.e. without anything else
>cluttering up the tree), for example
>/users/fred/porting/less_1.2.3
>
>On the other hand, binary distributions are typically a
>collection of files installed in several standard places,
>alongside installations of other distributions, for example
>/usr/local/bin, /usr/local/man etc.  RPM is just the job for
>managing the latter, but seems to me to be pointless for the
>former.

OK, so RPM doesn't have such a big advantage for source as for binaries,
but this isn't a _dis_advantage.

In fact, there is some value to having source in a standard place, for
example, /usr/src/linux/ or the FreeBSD ports collection.

>2: Exclusive/Inclusive destinations
>
>Source distributions typically create a single directory tree,
>with the top level directory having the version number appended
>to the name, for example less_1.2.3.  Installing a new
>distribution version of source typically means creating a new
>source tree.
>
>However for binary distributions, the installation typically
>replaces previous versions.  Again, I can see that RPM is useful 
>for the latter but not for the former.

Again, not actually a problem.

>Both of these show how the way RPM (and presumeably other package 
>managers) add value to binary distributions.  These same 
>facilities, which are value-added for binary distributions are 
>actually (in my opinion) of no use, indeed are unwanted for source 
>distributions.  As a result, I don't see that RPM adds value to 
>source distributions over tar/gzip archives - and if it doesn't 
>add value then it's unnecessary baggage.

Source RPMs aren't just a gimmick.  It's very useful for most people to
be able to download, compile and install programs with a simple command.
 Not to mention the advantages of pristine source and well-defined
patches, that make it easy to keep Cygwin32 versions in sync with the
author's releases.

>The things I (and 
>presumeably most developers) do with source distributions is 
>"make" et. al., modify files, re-make and "make install" - or 
>perhaps even "make rpm" (to make a binary RPM distribution 8-) ).  
>The things I (and presumeably most people) do with binary 
>distributions are quite different - install/upgrade and run.
>
>I guess what I'm saying, is that I don't see what advantages there 
>are in going to the trouble of building RPMs for source 
>distributions, and I can see several disadvantages.

I would be inclined to agree, say "what the heck, just use tgz, it's
easier", but if you use RPM for binary distributions, the marginal
effort to use it for source distributions as well is not great.

--
Ed Avis
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".