Packager Proposition

Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee highos at
Mon Apr 1 14:52:25 PST 2002


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.

Hrm.  I see no reason why we need to add anything to the profiles to get
Package Management Support (PMS) working.  We could even add support for
it into ALFS without even being tied down to any single implementation.

Which is not a bad idea, when you consider how many different options
there are these days.  At least, given a few limitations.


What if we left it up to the implementation?  Think about it for a
second.  We wouldn't have to add anything to the syntax and each
implementation could use there own PMS (or support multiple differents
ones) and we wouldn't have to worry about it in the long run for ALFS.

What the heck am i talking about?  Ok, bear with me here, as an exmaple;

I've been using a very simple PMS for a very long time now.  It started
back before i even heard of LFS or got the idea of building my own
system.  It is the tried, tested and true idea of using two find
statements, one before and after an install.  However, that's kinda
dated now, considering the use of a timestamp is much more efficient.

Now, to intergrate support for this into an ALFS implementation could
sound pretty tricky, however it's really just a simple matter.

All that would be required is whenever we run into a new <package>, Get
a new timestamp and continue on.  Then when we are finished with the
package, run our find statement.  Bingo, done.

I even believe Neven is doing something similar to this in nALFS
allready. [I've been a lazy mofo and haven't read the other posts in
this thread yet, sorry ;p]

Simple and a little elagent, Da?

Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee  ( highos at linuxfromscratch dot org )
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