X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <448DC0BC.10103@tlinx.org> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:30:04 -0700 From: Linda Walsh User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: RPM's require to much knowledge of setup to port easily References: <061020062022 DOT 10945 DOT 448B29F200067FE000002AC122068246930A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <448B643D DOT 6040401 AT tlinx DOT org> <448C73CA DOT 60703 AT tlinx DOT org> <20060611203927 DOT GG12755 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> In-Reply-To: <20060611203927.GG12755@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Christopher Faylor wrote: > There is no one-to-one equivalent to "rpm -qi" but "rpm -qf" is equivalent > to "cygcheck -f" and "cygcheck -c " will give you the package > --- That's part of the problem. There may or may not be a 1:1 equivalent for whatever option I'm used to with rpm. I don't use those administrative options often, but I use them more often on linux than cygwin. I end up forgetting if something is a supported option or not -- I may go and look for the command, only to find it's one of the unsupported options. I've already wasted too much time at that point, and lost my train of thought. I remember reading about a study somewhere regarding attention and productivity. In the average office environment, people got interrupted every 10-15 minutes. However, it took the average person 25 minutes to get refocused on the task they were doing. Heck, how many times do I go from the living room to my bedroom to get something, then do something completely different, only to come back out to the living room and realize I'd forgotten to do what I went back for? Distractions are the bane of productivity. Figuring out and remembering yet another way to do things just for cygwin is just another "minor" distraction. > > It's not clear that you really understand that 1) cygwin "packages" are > just tar files and 2) there is already a way to do some of the things > that you have mentioned. > ---- Yes, and? > I wouldn't mind moving to a more accepted packaging format but I don't > think that doing so would make people more inclined to contribute > packages. A setup.hint file is much simpler than an rpm spec file so, > unless you actually already understand rpm spec files, moving to rpm > could actually add an additional burden to package submission. > ---- For people with an existing .rpm file, work to create .rpm file = near zero. Anything above zero is an infinite percent more work ((large or small)/zero). If one has a a package, that has no rpm, just a tarball, then yes, a setup file may be easier, but the vast majority of tools ported here, I can find near equivalences for under some distro (SuSE, RH, Mandriva). >> I still don't get all the reasons behind forcing everyone into a >> new format. Is it just a power trip or what? >> > > Actually, the "new" (i.e., five+ year old) format was imposed on us by > the Trilateral Commission. --- Ah, but you avoided answering the question. Why did the cygwin project go with another package format? It can't be because rpm doesn't run natively under Win -- since when installing system for the first time, a non-rpm setup & install process is used. "Rpm" is used after the basic packages are loaded. Something else I can't do in setup -- I can't do a the equivalent of a "rpm -qpi" or "rpm -ql" to see the information about the package or what files it's going to install from the command line. The 1 phrase description in setup leaves more than a bit to be desired. -l -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/