Re: RPM packages for afterstep-1.7.x versions

Brad (brad@eclipse.net)
Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:42:42 -0500


Tony Nugent wrote:

> On Sun Jan 17 1999 at 13:54, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> > No.  1.7 is a developer's version.  You have to build from source.
> > The latest FAQ explains the number-scheme change.
>
> Oh, I am aware of this.  However, with a working .spec file, it's
> relatively easy to build .i386.rpm and .src.rpm files.
>
> This would be ideal for developers, who can (re)build a package (in a
> consistant way) and install it for testing very trivially.  And then
> uninstall or upgrade it just as trivially.  That's the big advantage
> with rpm packages (as I'm sure you are well aware).
>
> I was hoping someone would say "yes, I've got a working .spec file for
> the 1.7.x development series"  :-)

One of the problems here is the speed of the AS development, patches seem
to be released quite frequently, so keeping up with it in rpm's would be a
pretty big task... also, you run into the problem of people using the devel
version that really shouldn't... some people instantly go for the highest
version number, not understanding it's a devel version, than get very angry
when everything doesn't work perfectly...  The reason to run the devel
series is to help develop AS, if they were rpm's, the user isn't as much
help debugging... on more than one occasion I've told allanon about a bug,
and he asked me to change something in the source, and test it out... with
rpm's, you can't do this....

As to installing older versions, I personally haven't had a need to with
AS, but I keep the source files for 1.6.6 compiled, so it's a simple "make
install" to overwrite the 1.7.x ...

-Hitchhiker


--
   WWW:   http://www.afterstep.org/
   FTP:   ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
   MAIL:  http://www.caldera.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html