Brian,
Yes but as far as I can see, you still have to define the files to install
and the dependencies in the spec file in the first place, so the argument is
academic, when you have the spec file for the binary RPM, then it is trivial
to add the ./configure;make commands required for a source RPM. The hard
part is defining the install part of RPM and what needs to be parsed on
install. Anyway I am not using RPM, I am using EPM.
Steve.
-----Original Message-----
From: Starlink development [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
McIlwrath, BK (Brian)
Sent: 19 January 2005 12:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Runtime dependencies
Starlink development wrote on :
> I'm no RPM expert -- I've only ever built one -- but I got
> the impression from talking to Tim last week that once you
> have the source RPM, a binary RPM can be generated from it
> either trivially or very simply. Thus given the choice (and
> presuming that EPM can support both), it occurs to me that it
> might be efficient to concentrate on the source RPM, as you
> then get the binary RPM more-or-less for free.
I have done SRPMS and spec files for the JED editor and this is my view as
well! The spec file gets built into the SRPM and it's then just one command
to get the binary RPM(s).
|