From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tim.rpsys.net (93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk [93.97.173.237]) by mx1.pokylinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92D064C80287 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 01:18:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9U6IAcF020038; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:18:10 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 19541-07; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:18:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9U6HuAN020032 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:17:58 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Gary Thomas In-Reply-To: <4CCB3EF4.9010604@mlbassoc.com> References: <4CCB3DC4.6070604@mlbassoc.com> <4CCB3EF4.9010604@mlbassoc.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:17:55 +0100 Message-ID: <1288419475.1285.2648.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Poky Subject: Re: RPM vs IPK X-BeenThere: poky@pokylinux.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Poky build system developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 06:18:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 15:39 -0600, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 10/29/2010 03:33 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: > > I notice that in the latest master, rpm-native is always built, > > even if I'm using ipk style packaging. > > > > * Why? > > * Why should I choose one over the other? I'm happy using rpm > > (been using it for 15 years!) but I wonder why the switch? > > Is rpm to become the de-facto packaging for Poky builds? > > Also, if it's to be rpm, will there be a yum (or equivalent)? > Otherwise, what tool will be used to manage dependency tracking, etc? This was covered in some emails that were sent a couple of months ago. Poky continues to support multiple packaging backends including ipk. We do however plan to use the best tools for the job and there is a tool called something like rpmdeps which does some dependency calculations really well. This tool is therefore used during do_package and the results are shared between all the packaging backends. As an example of the kind of dependency it can provide, it will look for scripts using python/perl/bash and then add the appropriate dependencies but there are other things as well. So the dependency on rpm-native is expected, it doesn't mean we're going rpm only, just that we use the best tools for the job. Also, since we do support packaging management with rpm, we did add zypper as our yum equivalent for the rpm use case. Cheers, Richard