From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baruch Siach Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 20:27:23 +0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 3/3] package/rpm: add host variant In-Reply-To: References: <1439486091-6564-1-git-send-email-james.knight@rockwellcollins.com> <1439486091-6564-3-git-send-email-james.knight@rockwellcollins.com> <20150818114453.05e19fae@free-electrons.com> <20150818160332.GX2765@tarshish> Message-ID: <20150818172723.GY2765@tarshish> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi James, On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:36:05PM -0400, James Knight wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Baruch Siach wrote: > > An alternative solution would be to switch Buildroot to rpm 4.x (latest > > version is 4.12.0). The 4.x series seems to be more actively maintained than > > rpm5, and is the version of choice for most distros using rpm > > Hmm... did not think of "downgrading". I guess if rpm4 was integrated > into Buildroot I would not have this issue (at this point in time). > After reading a bit of the upgrade-fork of rpm5, maybe it would be > better to provide an rpm4 and rpm5 package. This would allow a builder > to choose either the common variant over the "latest-greatest" > variant. I'd be worried to just transition from rpm5 down to rpm4 in > case any other developer would prefer using rpm5. I wouldn't call rpm5 "latest". It has forked from rpm in 2008, and is developed independently. The current Buildroot version has not been updated since 2009, quite far from "latest". Switching to latest rpm 4.x could as well be considered a "bump". baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -