BLFS TODO package tracking.

Manuel,
   Adding a version to the tracking name might not be that
difficult. If 
you had previously installed a different version what
action(s) would 
you expect.

   If the action is 'always install' newer packages how do
we handle 
upgrading packages where the 'new package' is a dependency
of a 
previously installed package. Also there is the problem of
existing 
configuration files.

   Maybe the tracking file should be more than just the
package name. A 
file (package-x.y.z) containing the dependencies installed
for that 
package?  If we go much further than this it will look like
a 
package-manager.


   George
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

El Lunes, 14 de Agosto de 2006 18:28, George Boudreau
escribió:
> Manuel,
>    Adding a version to the tracking name might not be
that difficult. If
> you had previously installed a different version what
action(s) would
> you expect.
>
>    If the action is 'always install' newer packages
how do we handle
> upgrading packages where the 'new package' is a
dependency of a
> previously installed package. Also there is the problem
of existing
> configuration files.
>
>    Maybe the tracking file should be more than just the
package name. A
> file (package-x.y.z) containing the dependencies
installed for that
> package?  If we go much further than this it will look
like a
> package-manager.

I expect something very simple.

My idea is can to say to the user: 

"package.1.1 is installed on your system, now BLFS has
been updated to 
package.1.2"

No more. Is for the user to decide if he want to upgrade it
and how to solve 
that type of dependencies. As you said, go beyond that is
for a package 
manegament tool, not for us.


-- 
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886:       http://www.linuxfroms
cratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomp
oslinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES:                           http://es.tldp.org
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

El Lunes, 14 de Agosto de 2006 22:47, M.Canales.es escribió:

More about that.

The tracking file could named as the package and contain the
version. 

A parser will be need to extract the version from
general.ent (hopping that 
the entities names matches the XML file names, not verified
yet)

When generating Config.in the tracking files are checked. If
a package is 
installed and have the same then the book, is skipped. I the
version differ 
the packge is showed adding into ( ) the installed version.

Then, we can add a check book to set if, when selecting the
new target 
package, the dependant packages that have a newer version
available must be 
updated or not.

Check box for the dependencies level a sudo usage need be
added also.

-- 
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886:       http://www.linuxfroms
cratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomp
oslinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES:                           http://es.tldp.org
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

M.Canales.es wrote:
> El Lunes, 14 de Agosto de 2006 22:47, M.Canales.es
escribió:
> 
> More about that.
> 
> The tracking file could named as the package and
contain the version. 
   prelim work on pkg version tracking in experimental..
> 
> A parser will be need to extract the version from
general.ent (hopping that 
> the entities names matches the XML file names, not
verified yet)
  Some packages do not match.. x7app x7lib do not exist in
general.ent 
and neither do the meta packages. (eg kde-full, gnome-full..
)
> 
> When generating Config.in the tracking files are
checked. If a package is 
> installed and have the same then the book, is skipped.
I the version differ 
> the packge is showed adding into ( ) the installed
version.
> 
> Then, we can add a check book to set if, when selecting
the new target 
> package, the dependant packages that have a newer
version available must be 
> updated or not.
> 
> Check box for the dependencies level a sudo usage need
be added also.
> 

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

El Martes, 15 de Agosto de 2006 03:37, George Boudreau
escribió:

>   Some packages do not match.. x7app x7lib do not exist
in general.ent
> and neither do the meta packages. (eg kde-full,
gnome-full.. )

Xorg7 build is a nightmare that will be very hard to fix, if
fixing it is 
possible at all :-/

About meta-packages the version issue don't look a big
problem to me. GNOME 
and KDE packages are often updated in block in the book,
thus an installation 
update will involve all related packages.

Plus, I think that the "Update installed
packages" option could work as a 
"Don't drop already installed packages"
function. That should be more easy to 
implement and could reinstall some installed packages that
depends on the 
updated ones, if the target depends on they also. If some
installed package 
don't need to be reinstalled, is easy for the user to
remove their build 
script before generating the Makefile.

-- 
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886:       http://www.linuxfroms
cratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomp
oslinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES:                           http://es.tldp.org
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page