Mandrake RPMs rebuilt

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 10:42 am, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

with one additional RPM built for the python "mx" package.

The postgresql RPMs themselves are built using the same spec file as
used by Lamar for the RH RPMS. The mx RPM is massaged from the RH source
RPM to remove gratuitous RH-isms and to remove references to the
Distutils package, which on Mandrake is included in the normal python
packages.

Thank you, Thomas.

I try to nix RedHatisms from my spec -- it is not always possible since I
only run RedHat on my Intel machines (I run SuSE 7.3 on my UltraSPARC, but
have not had time to work on SuSEifying the 7.2 set yet), and I don't always
know what the RedHatisms are.

Back in the 7.0.x days I found a number of RedHatisms while putting together
GreatBridge's RPMsets, but that knowledge isn't as applicable today as it was
then.

I do know that Mandrake is just as guilty in applying 'Mandrakisms' -- but at
least they are documented. :-)

It does make it difficult to maintain a 'generic' RPM.....

Speaking of, I may be able to get another release out this week to fix some
problems that have been brought to my attention. We'll see how I recuperate
from my last 18 16-hour days..... (18 _consecutive_ days.....)

I'll look at your mx RPM's spec and compare to RedHat's -- if a finer grained
dependency can be determined, then we can go that route, as the eGenix mx
stuff goes by more names than just 'mx'.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

(dropped -general from the recipients)

I try to nix RedHatisms from my spec -- it is not always possible since I
only run RedHat on my Intel machines (I run SuSE 7.3 on my UltraSPARC, but
have not had time to work on SuSEifying the 7.2 set yet), and I don't always
know what the RedHatisms are.

So far, the only things I had to do were to generate an "mx" RPM for my
machine, since the eGenix modules are not apparently available from Mdk
sites.

Maybe this is one reason:

WARNING: Using this file is only recommended if you really must
use it for some reason. It is not being actively maintained !

(from the header of the mxDateTime module :(

I'll look at your mx RPM's spec and compare to RedHat's -- if a finer grained
dependency can be determined, then we can go that route, as the eGenix mx
stuff goes by more names than just 'mx'.

Right. The RH spec seems to have called it "mx2" sometimes, and who
knows what else it is called once it is packaged (the tarballs have the
eGenix name in them).

The RH spec file did weird things like explicitly reference
"/usr/bin/python2.2" as the python executable rather than
/usr/bin/python, perhaps because of problems with their build of
python-2.2. Mandrake 8.1 has python-2.1, and I was able to use your
techniques for version detection from the Pg spec file instead.

Anyway, I'm not sure what the future of the mx package is, or whether
there is an alternative in the python package set. It is a fairly simple
build, so occasionally grabbing the RH package and rebuilding isn't a
big deal.

- Thomas

Thomas Lockhart <thomas@fourpalms.org> writes:

(dropped -general from the recipients)
So far, the only things I had to do were to generate an "mx" RPM for my
machine, since the eGenix modules are not apparently available from Mdk
sites.

Maybe this is one reason:

WARNING: Using this file is only recommended if you really must
use it for some reason. It is not being actively maintained !

(from the header of the mxDateTime module :(

It is a standard part of the Python DB API, for better or worse.

I'll look at your mx RPM's spec and compare to RedHat's -- if a finer grained
dependency can be determined, then we can go that route, as the eGenix mx
stuff goes by more names than just 'mx'.

Right. The RH spec seems to have called it "mx2" sometimes, and who
knows what else it is called once it is packaged (the tarballs have the
eGenix name in them).

They're set up so you can create mx or mx2, in order to have python
1.5 and python 2.2 installed in parallel.

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes:

Speaking of, I may be able to get another release out this week to fix some
problems that have been brought to my attention.

You really want the last set of changes I did... the initial one is
broken wrt. contrib (the paths in it broken for 7.1, fixed, then
broken differently on 7.2)

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 04:45 pm, Trond Eivind Glomsr�d wrote:

Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes:

Speaking of, I may be able to get another release out this week to fix
some problems that have been brought to my attention.

You really want the last set of changes I did... the initial one is
broken wrt. contrib (the paths in it broken for 7.1, fixed, then
broken differently on 7.2)

Are the latest changes in 7.2-1.72? Or do you have newer ones?

Love the changelog comments.... Particularly the one about my changelog entry
that didn't escape a macro... :-)
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11