Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 12:17:29PM +0200, Hendrik-Jan Heins wrote:
I think you do have a very good point about the naming convention. However, I am not sure whether I can just use "mdk" as Mandriva does on the packages, as that could create some confusion about where they came from. As fas as I could find out, Mandriva itself (and people who are in some ways affiliated) use this extension. I am open to suggestions, so if you have a suggestion for a naming extention that is clear and describes where the package is for, please tell me.
We've never been told by Mandrake that our naming convention was problematic, so I think including 'mdk' in it should not pose a problem. I've done this myself in the past without issue, so would suggest it here as well.
Right. I'll change that now. I just rebuilt the packages to be named .mdk I think I'll get them in place of the older ones today.
I suppose that the static builds could be used in any distro that can handle .rpm files. However Mandriva uses a menu (like Debian's menu), and as far as I know, the static packages don't contain a menu entry that the .hjh packages do have.
Yes, I also ran into this specific issue when creating mandrake RPMs of Inkscape.
And just as you already pointed out, dependencies on other packages can be a real problem. Part of the problem is in naming rpm packages in the package that are neded for it to run (different naming conventions in the different distros). But also the different versions of glibc, gcc etc.. that are used can pose a problem. However... it doesn't have to be. I read a post somewhere about NVu x86_64, for which I also made an RPM package. In that post there was someone using Debian and Alien to convert the package to a .deb package. According to that post, it did work for him. Of course, this is no more than anecdotical. If you really want to know if an RPM package can be used on all distros, you should test every new version, on every distro and version.
Hendrik-Jan Heins