This is a discussion on Re: Changes in our .spec file within the SNMP Coders forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; Wes Hardaker wrote: > I see a few choices that are acceptable: > > 1) provide our own list of ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
Wes Hardaker wrote:
> I see a few choices that are acceptable: > > 1) provide our own list of packages and add conflicts lines > 2) provide multiple spec files that better track the remote systems > (possibly autobuilt from a single base template but split differently > to match the different systems). I'd say: both. :-) Seriously, the approach I'm currently using for the net-snmp packaging at the openSuSE Build Service is to have one set of packaging files for each group of distros (RedHat-esque, SuSE-esque, Debian-based etc.). Within each group, we can always make our own choice on how to best split into sub-packages. Taking a step back, the major question is: are we willing to offer packaging for other Linux distros than RedHat/Fedora? Since a single spec file for all is impractical in my experience, a "yes" would mean moving current dist/net-snmp.spec and dist/*init.d into a new sub-directory dist/linux-redhat-esque (or the like) and start supporting other groups of distros by creating additional packaging files in dist/linux-suse-esque etc. Thoughts? +Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757...un.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...et-snmp-coders |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|