Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[hendricks]

Hi Dan, Jason, Jeff, Olaf, Brad, etc


Here is an idea for a cross-distribution single cd product sold/shipped
by all ppc distributions:

What we really need is a single updates CD to help bring recently
shipped distributions up to date with the latest versions of things:

Included on the disk would be:

1. openmotif with ppc patches and jdk motif bug fixes included + source

2. Jack Howarth's latest XFree 4.0 rpms + source

3. Xpmac latest with some recent updates from Ryuichi + source

4. Mozilla Milestone 16 (or the latest from the cvs tree) + source

5. Gnome Helix 1.2 rpms  + source

6. KDE 2.0 Beta 2 rpms + source

7. Franz's latest gcc 2.93 rpms + source

8. Franz's latest binutils rpms + source

9. All of the security updates since the last release of each
distribution + source

10. 2.2.16 kernel to fix latest kernel security issue + source

11. Binaries of JDK 1.1.8 final, JDK 1.2.2 final, jdk 1.3_beta  + SCSL
diffs

12. The latest Mac-On-Linux which will actually work under Mac OS 9.0.4

Plus possibly a selection of contributed RPMs + source (like R (the
stats package), Jack's molecule viewer, etc).

My idea is that the iso-image (identical) would be available from all
distributions and also sold for some small fee by all distributions.

I can create all of the JDK binaries, I am building the kde2 beta 2
stuff as I write this, I have all the GNOME Helix 1.2 binaries and
srpms, Jack has the XFree 4.0 rpms and srpms with the latest G4/Rage 128
Pro fixes in place, I have the Xpmac source (and some changes from
Ryuichi to integrate), I have access to alot of patches (both from
Blackdown and Sun) that fix serious bugs in OpenMotif 2.1, Franz already
has posted his latest tool chain, and Paul's 2.2.16 rsync kernel is
available right now.  I also have the cvs from last night of Mozilla and
will build it this week.

All of this would be available for some sort of joint effort to quickly
get out an updates CD for everyone to use.

What do people think?  Is this stealing too much thunder from thenext
distributions releases?  If not, I say let's do it.

Comments welcome!

Kevin





--
Kevin B. Hendricks
Associate Professor of Operations and Information Technology
Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario  N6A-3K7  CANADA
khendricks@ivey.uwo.ca, (519) 661-3874, fax: 519-661-3959

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Olaf Hering]

On Sun, Jun 18, hendricks wrote:


> My idea is that the iso-image (identical) would be available from all
> distributions and also sold for some small fee by all distributions.
>
> I can create all of the JDK binaries, I am building the kde2 beta 2
> stuff as I write this, I have all the GNOME Helix 1.2 binaries and
> srpms, Jack has the XFree 4.0 rpms and srpms with the latest G4/Rage 128
> Pro fixes in place, I have the Xpmac source (and some changes from
> Ryuichi to integrate), I have access to alot of patches (both from
> Blackdown and Sun) that fix serious bugs in OpenMotif 2.1, Franz already
> has posted his latest tool chain, and Paul's 2.2.16 rsync kernel is
> available right now.  I also have the cvs from last night of Mozilla and
> will build it this week.
>
> All of this would be available for some sort of joint effort to quickly
> get out an updates CD for everyone to use.
>
> What do people think?  Is this stealing too much thunder from thenext
> distributions releases?  If not, I say let's do it.

The idea is good, but it will not work because every distro has its own
filesystem structure. As example, we put everything under
/opt/{kde,gnome}, the RedHat based distros somewhere under /usr. Another
problem is the naming convention of the rpm files. We have a rpms with
maximal 8 chars and this will lead to problems when upgrading the stuff.
You can not mix that or your rpm database becomes useless.



Gruss Olaf

--
 $ man clone

BUGS
       Main feature not yet implemented...

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Bryan Stillwell]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Olaf Hering wrote:

> The idea is good, but it will not work because every distro has its own
> filesystem structure. As example, we put everything under
> /opt/{kde,gnome}, the RedHat based distros somewhere under /usr. Another
> problem is the naming convention of the rpm files. We have a rpms with
> maximal 8 chars and this will lead to problems when upgrading the stuff.
> You can not mix that or your rpm database becomes useless.

Why is that?  It pisses me off that rpms for one distro won't work with
another distro.  It's like the same work is always being done 5 times more
than necessary.  I've never used suse personally, but I've tried using a
suse rpm witha redhat installation and it just screwed everything up.
Same thing happen to me when trying to use a Mandrake rpm...  Why are the
Linux distro companies fighting over something as simple as packaging
format?  Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome?  Isn't
/opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?

Just my good old $.02 worth.  My frustrations with the different distros
fighting each other has caused me to switch to Debian...  Now if only
there was a company that would make a Linux distro based off of Debian but
would maintain package compatibility with the main Debian tree, I would
probably throw a far bit of money their way.  :)  (Corel Linux just
doesn't do it for me, and Storm Linux is quite a bit out of date the last
I checked.)  My feeling is that rpms have split too much down alternate
paths to try and save them now...  It's nice to know that the Debian folk
have now ported most of the packages to the ppc platform imo.

I guess my main question for writing this message is will the various
distros (Yellowdog, linuxppc, suse, etc.) ever get package compatibility
where I can use a rpm from suse and install it on a yellowdog box?  or
will Debian be the best choice for me in the near/distant future for any
platform?

Bryan


** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Steven Hanley]

> Why is that?  It pisses me off that rpms for one distro won't work with
> another distro.  It's like the same work is always being done 5 times more
> than necessary.

well the snide answer form me would be because redhat is broken or at
least braindead in how they structure the system and thgus Suse had to
fix it up. It probably isnt that bad but hey.

> I've never used suse personally,

I have and quite happily admit if debian didnt exist suse would be my
preferred distribution. I never feel as if suse is quite so braindead
when sitting at a suse box as I do at redhat to some degree and
definitely at mandrake (the few times I have had to admin mandrake
machines have been painful, though this all again can be attripted to
the fact I am used to debian.)

> but I've tried using a
> suse rpm witha redhat installation and it just screwed everything up.
> Same thing happen to me when trying to use a Mandrake rpm...  Why are the
> Linux distro companies fighting over something as simple as packaging
> format?  Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome?  Isn't
> /opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?

well all the major distributioons AFAIK have said they would start
standardising around the recent LSB standards (2.* versions of the
standard) that were released. All that is except slackware, but then
thats slackware for you (I will refrain form saying more).

Interestingly of course you will note the recent standards I just
mentioned are closer to what debian looks like today than any other
distribution. :)

>
> Just my good old $.02 worth.  My frustrations with the different distros
> fighting each other has caused me to switch to Debian...  Now if only
> there was a company that would make a Linux distro based off of Debian but
> would maintain package compatibility with the main Debian tree, I would
> probably throw a far bit of money their way.  :)  (Corel Linux just
> doesn't do it for me, and Storm Linux is quite a bit out of date the last
> I checked.)  My feeling is that rpms have split too much down alternate
> paths to try and save them now...  It's nice to know that the Debian folk
> have now ported most of the packages to the ppc platform imo.

well this is a good thing debian are doing (yet more good things) the
next generation package management library they have been working on for
the last year or so is aimed at beingg able to handle any package
formats from the different distributions, not only deb format. I dont
actually know if this new system will be in woody or not though.

> I guess my main question for writing this message is will the various
> distros (Yellowdog, linuxppc, suse, etc.) ever get package compatibility
> where I can use a rpm from suse and install it on a yellowdog box?  or
> will Debian be the best choice for me in the near/distant future for any
> platform?

well currently of course suse has still not released their ppc
distribution. this is unfortunate in my eyes as I am still stuck with
yellowdog on my ppc box. I also cant get debian ppc cds anywhere yet
which would solve my problems for good (putting debian on the ppc box I
have) and as in this country we pay 19c/MB for download and no one can
easily get a connection faster than a modem I dont really want to
install of the net, even with apt making the whole process so incredibly
trivial.

I suppose that would be my input in the friendly local distribution war
scheduled for today....

	See You
	    Steve

--
sjh@wibble.net http://wibble.net/~sjh/
Look Up In The Sky
   Is it a bird?  No
      Is it a plane?  No
         Is it a small blue banana?
YES

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Hollis Blanchard]

Bryan Stillwell wrote:
>
> I've never used suse personally, but I've tried using a
> suse rpm witha redhat installation and it just screwed everything up.

I look at that as trying to install an OS/2 binary onto a Windows box
(and then complaining that it doesn't work).

> Why are the
> Linux distro companies fighting over something as simple as packaging
> format?

The package format is the same (rpm), it's the contents that differ. And
I really don't see a fight - everyone seems quite happy to let the
others do what they want.

> Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome? sn't
> /opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?

It all depends on what "standard" you're using.

> I guess my main question for writing this message is will the various
> distros (Yellowdog, linuxppc, suse, etc.) ever get package compatibility
> where I can use a rpm from suse and install it on a yellowdog box?  or
> will Debian be the best choice for me in the near/distant future for any
> platform?

The distributions all want to make their stuff the best. And since
people have different opinions on what's best, distributions differ.
That's the way it goes.

I should also note that Debian packages also don't work well with other
distributions.

-Hollis

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Michel Dänzer]

Hollis Blanchard wrote:
>
> Bryan Stillwell wrote:
> >
> > I've never used suse personally, but I've tried using a
> > suse rpm witha redhat installation and it just screwed everything up.
>
> I look at that as trying to install an OS/2 binary onto a Windows box
> (and then complaining that it doesn't work).

Huh??? We are speaking about the same binaries for the same OS, but packaged
in an incompatible manner.


> > Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome? sn't
> > /opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?
>
> It all depends on what "standard" you're using.

Check out FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/), which is an affiliated project
of The Free Standards Group.

Debian is already mostly FHS conformant and aiming to be fully so AFAIK.


> I should also note that Debian packages also don't work well with other
> distributions.

But at least there aren't incompatible flavours of debs - you find a deb
somewhere, you install it, it works.


Michel


--
Why drink & drive when you can smoke and fly???
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)  \  CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \   member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Olaf Hering]

On Mon, Jun 19, Michel Dänzer wrote:


> > > Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome? sn't
> > > /opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?
> >
> > It all depends on what "standard" you're using.
>
> Check out FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/), which is an affiliated project
> of The Free Standards Group.
>
> Debian is already mostly FHS conformant and aiming to be fully so AFAIK.

<AOL>
me too
</AOL>

Just read FHS (2.0 for 6.4-ppc) and compare it with the reality. It will
be amazing. Flamewars should go to comp.os.advocacy ;)


Gruss Olaf

--
 $ man clone

BUGS
       Main feature not yet implemented...

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Hollis Blanchard]

Michel D wrote
> Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> >
> > I look at that as trying to install an OS/2 binary onto a Windows box
> > (and then complaining that it doesn't work).
>
> Huh??? We are speaking about the same binaries for the same OS, but packaged
> in an incompatible manner.

Yes, and from two completely different companies.

Of course you usually *can* get a foreign rpm to install, it's just that
it's not unusual for it not to work with your system (or may break other
things in your system). Since neither company is testing their software
packages for compatibility with the other, this is not unexpected.

> > > Also, what's this about suse using /opt for kde and gnome? sn't
> > > /opt in the filesystem standard for commercial software only?
> >
> > It all depends on what "standard" you're using.
>
> Check out FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/), which is an affiliated project
> of The Free Standards Group.

Ah, there it is. linuxbase.org needs to be a little better about
organizing their website it seems...

Getting back to /opt, it seems "The use of /opt for add-on software is a
well-established practice in the UNIX community." "Distributions may
install software in /opt, ..." blah blah blah.

It should be noted that this is just one standard, and on top of that a
standard only has strength if enough folks adhere to it. (Of course I
don't know of any others for Linux, and I think most distributions have
said they "will" adhere to it, whatever that means...)

> > I should also note that Debian packages also don't work well with other
> > distributions.
>
> But at least there aren't incompatible flavours of debs - you find a deb
> somewhere, you install it, it works.

Debian is of course a single organization (and honestly I don't know
anything about Corel or Storm or any compatibility issues there - isn't
Corel using an old glibc?). If only RedHat used RPM, you can bet any rpm
you could find would work.

-Hollis

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Need for Cross Platform Updates Distribution

[Michel Dänzer]

Hollis Blanchard wrote:

> Of course you usually *can* get a foreign rpm to install,

I know, I've updated a few hopelessly outdated packages on the SuSE 6.4 at
work using RedHat RPMs.


> it's just that it's not unusual for it not to work with your system (or may
> break other things in your system). Since neither company is testing their
> software packages for compatibility with the other, this is not unexpected.

Thanks, I think I understand the problem.


> linuxbase.org needs to be a little better about organizing their website it
> seems...

Sorry, forgot to mention www.freestandards.org


> > > I should also note that Debian packages also don't work well with other
> > > distributions.
> >
> > But at least there aren't incompatible flavours of debs - you find a deb
> > somewhere, you install it, it works.
>
> Debian is of course a single organization (and honestly I don't know
> anything about Corel or Storm or any compatibility issues there - isn't
> Corel using an old glibc?).

The .deb dependancy system won't let you install a package which wouldn't work
unless you really really want to.


> If only RedHat used RPM, you can bet any rpm you could find would work.

True. A good point for .deb IMHO ;)


Michel


--
Why drink & drive when you can smoke and fly???
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)  \  CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \   member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/