R P Herrold wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > >> Y'know, I sorta like that idea - say, a script or program that you can >> hand it info, such as if you've just built PHP the way I mentioned, and >> have it be added to the rpmdb. That would also let you know if you did a >> yum updgrade, and if a newer version than what you'd build had been >> added to the regular distro. > > and this random guessing and recordatation to pollute the RPM > database "varies from ** and ** is better than" using a > package built from a pre-defined recipe driven by a .spec > file, just how? Well, when it insists on building in /usr/src/redhat, and then cannot find a std. include file (config.h, down in, say, /lib/modules/2.6.18-194.3.1.el5/build/include/linux/config.h), as happened to me a week or two ago.... I'd *MUCH* rather have one directory, with everything in it related to whatever I was building, and have *one* place to tell it what it needed to find (such as the above). > > packaging is not rocket science; building packages from a spec > file and tarball and patches is profusely documented > > All RPM needs is for people to read and use the tools, and all > this is done well presently Right. And the folks who build packages and don't even consider the possibility of looking at a *higher* subrelease of a library (had that a number of times). We won't even begin to talk about python.... <snip> mark