help-cfengine
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Patch to add install action to packages:


From: Phil D'Amore
Subject: Re: Patch to add install action to packages:
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:50:07 -0500

This is a head-scratcher.  These look like normal NEVR combinations to
me.  I just posted an updated patch for RPMPackageCheck() to the bug
list that fixes two problems you may have been running into.  I'd
appreciate any feedback you can give on whether or not that fixes your
problems.

On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 15:36, Mark Burgess wrote:
> Quoting Phil D'Amore <address@hidden>:
> 
> > Thanks.  This is kind of odd, because these names appear to follow the 
> > standard N-V-R convention of RPM.  My code relies on the whole N-E:V-R 
> > (Name-Epoch:Version-Release) working "properly", which I suspect is 
> > where the breakdown may be happening.  Can I get you to do the same 
> > thing, but this time with a queryformat:
> > 
> > rpm -qa --queryformat "%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n"
> > 
> 
> Here it comes
> 
> esound-(none):0.2.35-4.2
> powersave-(none):0.8.19.13-0.1
> java-1_4_2-sun-(none):1.4.2.06-1.1
> automake-(none):1.9.1-4
> libstdc++-devel-(none):3.3.4-11
> uim-(none):0.4.3-3
> gcc-c++-(none):3.3.4-11
> xine-lib-(none):0.99.rc6a-4.2
> canna-libs-(none):3.7p3-3
> xemacs-packages-info-(none):20040202-57
> alsaplayer-(none):0.99.76-70
> kdelibs3-(none):3.3.0-34.3
> release-notes-(none):9.2-21.6
> libopencdk-(none):0.5.4-4
> perl-HTML-Tagset-(none):3.03-552
> perl-Net-DNS-(none):0.48-2
> gnome-panel-(none):2.6.2-43
> yelp-(none):2.6.1-6
> libsoup-(none):2.2.0-3.2
> samba-client-(none):3.0.9-2.3
> mc-(none):4.6.0-332.2
> iproute2-(none):2.4.7-870.4
> db41-devel-(none):4.1.25-75
> python-(none):2.3.4-3.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > This is similar to what cfengine does to get the version information, 
> > but I added the name part in here so I can still see it for comparison.  
> > Epoch is a bloody mess, and if it turns out I need to add a way to 
> > ignore the epoch in order to make some variants of RPM work properly, I 
> > should be able to do so without breaking the existing interface.
> > 
> > Thanks again!
> > 
> > Mark Burgess wrote:
> > 
> > >>From rpm -qa
> > >
> > >
> > >gcc-c++-3.3.4-11
> > >xine-lib-0.99.rc6a-4.2
> > >canna-libs-3.7p3-3
> > >xemacs-packages-info-20040202-57
> > >alsaplayer-0.99.76-70
> > >kdelibs3-3.3.0-34.3
> > >release-notes-9.2-21.6
> > >libopencdk-0.5.4-4
> > >perl-HTML-Tagset-3.03-552
> > >perl-Net-DNS-0.48-2
> > >gnome-panel-2.6.2-43
> > >yelp-2.6.1-6
> > >libsoup-2.2.0-3.2
> > >samba-client-3.0.9-2.3
> > >mc-4.6.0-332.2
> > >iproute2-2.4.7-870.4
> > >db41-devel-4.1.25-75
> > >python-2.3.4-3.2
> > >
> > >
> > >M
> > >
> > >On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 18:00 -0500, Phil D'Amore wrote:
> > >  
> > >
> > >>Out of curiosity, can you post an example?  I've never seen their naming
> > >>convention.
> > >>
> > >>On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 17:16, Mark Burgess wrote:
> > >>    
> > >>
> > >>>I was trying to use this on SuSE recently, whihc also uses RPM but it 
> > >>>does
> > not
> > >>>work because the package naming convention is different, There is clearly
> > >>>a lot to be done on the matter of package management,
> > >>>
> > >>>M
> > >>>
> > >>>      
> > >>>
> > >>>>Phil D'Amore wrote:
> > >>>>        
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>I used RPM as an example here, but all three supported package managers
> > >>>>>*should* work.  You can actually use more than one package manager at
> > >>>>>once, since each keeps its own to-be-installed list.  If folks could
> > >>>>>test the Debian and Sun parts of this, it'd be greatly appreciated, as
> > I
> > >>>>>don't really have the facilities to do so ;).  Most of the code for
> > this
> > >>>>>is package manager agnostic, except for the part that decides which
> > >>>>>variable to read for the install command (RPMInstallCommand,
> > >>>>>DPKGInstallCommand, SUNInstallCommand), so I'm expecting it will Just
> > >>>>>Work (tm).
> > >>>>>          
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>I realize that I'm not up to speed on the packages section and its 
> > >>>>support - but there are more than three package formats.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Beyond the three listed above, I can think of several:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>* HP-UX software depots
> > >>>>* FreeBSD packages
> > >>>>* Slackware packages
> > >>>>
> > >>>>And this doesn't account for alternative installation programs, although
> > 
> > >>>>that may not be relevant - RPMInstall command could be set to "apt-get 
> > >>>>install" for instance.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>However, I find the names "RPMInstallCommand" et al to be just ghastly. 
> > >>>>  What if RPM is phased out and replaced with the new name 
> > >>>>FooBarPackageMgr?  What if someone installs RPM on a SUN machine?  What 
> > >>>>if someone installs RPM onto Debian and uses it?  More importantly, how 
> > >>>>are you EVER going to be able to get ALL package managers represented?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>The commands ought to be package manager neutral, should they not?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>-- 
> > >>>>David Douthitt
> > >>>>UNIX System Administrator
> > >>>>Linux+, LPIC-1, RHCE
> > >>>>HP-UX, Unixware, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD
> > >>>>Member: ACM, USENIX/SAGE
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>Help-cfengine mailing list
> > >>>>address@hidden
> > >>>>http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> > >>>>
> > >>>>        
> > >>>>
> > >>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >>>Work: +47 22453272            Email:  address@hidden
> > >>>Fax : +47 22453205            WWW  :  http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark
> > >>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>Help-cfengine mailing list
> > >>>address@hidden
> > >>>http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> > >>>      
> > >>>
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > 
> > -- 
> > Phil D'Amore                             "Sometimes there is a fine line
> > Senior System Administrator               between criminally abusive
> > Red Hat, Inc                              behavior and fun."
> > Office: 919.754.3700 x44395                 -- Ted the Generic Guy
> > Pager: 877.383.8795                            (Dilbert 4/19/2003)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Work: +47 22453272            Email:  address@hidden
> Fax : +47 22453205            WWW  :  http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
-- 
Phil D'Amore                             "Sometimes there is a fine line
Senior System Administrator               between criminally abusive
Red Hat, Inc                              behavior and fun."
Office: 919.754.3700 x44395                 -- Ted the Generic Guy
Pager: 877.383.8795                            (Dilbert 4/19/2003)





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]