tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

[GSoC2011][STATUS-UPDATE]Add support for FreeBSD package format, RPM and Debian packages(if time allows) to pkgsrc


What is done (in repo):

- changed "flavor" to "pkgformat"
- changed "FLAVOR" to "PKG_FORMAT"
- tested the above with several packages in pkg format

- created RPM package: (b)make PKG_FORMAT=rpm package

In I added the following to make sure that the rpm tool is installed:
.if defined(PKG_FORMAT) && !empty(PKG_FORMAT) && (${PKG_FORMAT} == "rpm")
. include "../../misc/rpm/"
I'm not sure that is the best way to do it.
Maybe this can be achieved in pkgsrc/mk/pkgformats(flavors)/rpm/pkgformat(flavor)

About Packager field in the rpm specfile, I'm writing: pkgsrc <>
About Prefix field in the rpm specfile: now it's /usr/pkg (LOCALBASE)
Installing rpm package:
show list of package files(I suggest to use different LOCALBASE and PKG_DBDIR ):
# /usr/pkg/bin/rpm -ql 9e-1.0-0
/usr/pkg/bin/9e � � � � � -> /usr/pkg/rpm/bin or /usr/rpm/bin
/var/db/pkg/9e-1.0/+CONTENTS �-> /var/db/pkg/rpm or /var/db/rpm

rpm package name is formed as:${PKGBASE}-${PKGVERSION}.${MACHINE_ARCH}${PKG_SUFX}
I hope that ${MACHINE_ARCH} is safe to use.

tarup: I'm not sure if these targets are aplicable to rpm packages

_pkgformat-check-conflicts: I don't think this is needed
_pkgformat-check-installed: I don't think this is needed
_pkgformat-register: I don't think this is needed

package-install: not ready
_pkgformat-deinstall: not ready
_pkgformat-install-dependencies: is this target responsible for building
packages from dependencies?

Can you recommend some packages to use for testing?

Best Regards,
Anton Panev.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index