[CentOS-devel] Updates from today

Thu Mar 10 16:12:36 UTC 2011
Zenon Panoussis <oracle at provocation.se>

On 03/10/2011 04:12 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:

>>> The complexity of this stuff is beyond what you are able to parse.

>> So, what I'm saying essentially is this: would you care to make the
>> de-branding and building process fully open, so that others can copy it,

> Johnny Hughes has already provided the info and the scripts . See 
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2011-February/006735.html 
> and later messages

Are you referring to http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/buildsystem/ and
http://mirror.centos.org/centos-4/4/build/distro/tmverifyrpms ? Indeed,
I had missed those.

But I was talking about "de-branding and building". For example, it has
been repeated over and over again that most changes are made in the build
root, not in the SRPMS themselves, but where can I find information about
the de-branding which actually *is* done in the SRPMS themselves? I could
find out by installing all the RH SRPMS in one directory and all the CentOS
SRPMS in another and diff'ing the two, but I assume there is already a list
of all the (known) modifications that are needed for de-branding. Has this
list been published somewhere?

Likewise, many of the changes to the build root - hidden dependencies etc -
are likely to have been documented somewhere. Sort of "note to self: need
to install external xyz from Fedora NN before building abc". Couldn't that
documentation be made public and easily accessible?

That last part, "easily accessible", is just as important as "public".
There might be lots of tidbits of information on this list, but finding
them is a drag.

Finally, I can't find any details on the process of comparing RPMs, apart
from tmverifyrpms that you just pointed me to. What needs to be compared,
apart from size? What is the definition of "good" or "good enough"?

If simple things like that, information that already exists, were to be
gathered in one place, the sharing of knowledge that I was talking about
would already be a fact.