Packager Proposition

Mark Ellis mark.uzumati at
Mon Apr 1 13:57:15 PST 2002

On 2002.04.01 10:11 Neven Has wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 11:26:08PM +0300, Silviu Julean wrote:
> > So why not add something like <packager="checkinstall"> in
> <postbuild>? This
> > could automatically create the required files and directories. In
> addition,
> > nALFS could configure all installed packages as RPM's, not only
> TGZ's; and
> > (l)users would use nALFS only when compiling their software, and
> then use
> > their packaging software. It would also obsolete the need for make
> > uninstall.
> I have added this in TODO.
> But I don't think there is a need for any info of that kind to be in
> the profiles. I used to have <root> and <prune> (or something like
> that)
> in the profiles for a find-like searches and it sucked. It just
> doesn't
> belong there.
> So I think an option within a program should be enough? A find search
> using a single find and a time stamp is now implemented (for 1.0.3)
> and now 'o' -> 'f' toggles between no file tracking, two find-search
> and
> one-find search. I think this method also belongs in there.
> In the future, a support for PIs in the profile will probably be
> added,
> which would allow most of the options, now changeable from the
> program,
> to also be changed by the profiles, giving more control to profile
> writers.
> That should be a nice way for changing methods for the above package
> management, setting different root directory on the fly for find-like
> searches (for pre and post chroot for example) etc.
> I haven't played much with PIs yet, but I'm guessing this is, more or
> less, what they are for?

Yes i think this is how it should be done, though i'm fairly unfamiliar 
with PIs too.

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list