This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: rpm-4.1 successful compile on Cygwin

Charles Wilson wrote:
> Max Bowsher wrote:
>> RPM includes a copy of Berkerly DB in its source tarball, and will
>> build with the internal db unless explicitly told to try using the
>> system db.
> Oh, ok.  If anybody wants to add rpm to the cygwin distribution as a
> supported package, though, it ought to use a system-provided db4
> library.  Which means somebody needs to give Nicholas a swift kick in
> the tookas (Hi, Nicholas. <g>)
>> In fact, I'm not sure if that mode would work at all, since
>> makes extensive mention of db3, but no mention of db4.
>> (The db4 in rpm is actually configured in a directory called db3 -
>> weird!).
> Well, that sounds like somebody took some shortcuts. OTOH, since Red
> Hat Linux uses rpm as its fundamental package manager, it makes sense
> for them to prefer a statically-linked binary of rpm -- and to highly
> control *EXACTLY* how that static binary is built.
> So they include their own copy of Berk DB, build it as a static lib,
> link against it, etc.
> However, if, during the upgrade from db3 to db4, they took shortcuts
> in the configury, then the rpm-4.x source is *broken* and they need
> to fix it.  Just because *Red Hat* doesn't care about dynamic linking
> to external db libs, doesn't mean that they should (silently) disallow
> it. They have the power/authority to make that decision -- but it
> should be well-documented and not simply be a hidden gotcha.
> Going by this principle: "Never attribute to maliciousness that which
> can be explained by stupidity", I'd  bet that IF external linking is
> broken, then it was a simple oversight and they'd welcome patches to
> fix the problem.
> But tracking that down and creating those patches would be the job of
> the person who actually wanted to add rpm.exe to the cygwin dist, and
> intends to support it. (e.g. not you, Max).

I'm not quite sure rpm really is desirable for the Cygwin dist, unless it
was decided to transition to rpm packages exclusively once setup was
suitably adapted.

It's mainly a toy for me, to learn about rpm, whilst not having to reboot
into Linux.


Unsubscribe info:
Bug reporting:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]