General Question and answer session.

[Was_Just19]

http://www.montanalinux.org/files/RPM_Build_Manual_Rev2.pdf

I still use it.

Also read this:
http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php/topic,56817.0.html

Much easier to get setup that way than to do it manually.

Just started to read that PDF ......  it calls for d/loading and setting up ***** -- as the very first thing to do.

Is that still valid?
If not then what is the recommended current alternative?

[Joble]

After you install task-package this command will do all that automagically.

Got It!
After installing pkgutils from synaptic, as user, not as root:

Code: [Select]

mkrepo -a -d "PCLinuxOS" -s "pclos" -v "PClinuxOS" -b "/home/(UserName)"

But you can still do it manually, if you really want to.  

------------------------

It should back up your sources list.  At least it did last time I tried it.

[Was_Just19]

I was asking about the build environment  .......  what is the current recommended environment which (presumably) replaces the Tiny Me environment called for in the PDF you linked to.

Thanks.

[Joble]

I use minime.  But there is a task-package for thunar as well, so you sould use any of them.  I installed on E17 just to see if I could, and it worked.

[Was_Just19]

I use minime.  But there is a task-package for thunar as well, so you sould use any of them.  I installed on E17 just to see if I could, and it worked.

OK, thanks ..........  nothing very special required so.   

I also meant to ask ........  how 'dangerous' is it to build on say a main install?
With the intention of testing on a different install ........

[Joble]

So, if you are not willing to break your install then don't do this stuff.  If you do break your install, you can certainly ask for help, but don't come crying to us about it.  I have broken my install many times and on one occasion actually wiped my entire drive.

I set up a package invironment, remastered and put it on liveusb.  No more wiped drives, just wiped changes partitions.   

[Was_Just19]

So, if you are not willing to break your install then don't do this stuff.  If you do break your install, you can certainly ask for help, but don't come crying to us about it.  I have broken my install many times and on one occasion actually wiped my entire drive.

I set up a package invironment, remastered and put it on liveusb.  No more wiped drives, just wiped changes partitions.   

But was the disaster due to the building or the testing of the result .....  that is what I am trying to get at 

[Joble]

That particular disaster was during install, so yeah, I was root when I did it.   

The USB makes a good testing environment too.

[Joble]

Split this, since it's not about setting up a repository.

[Was_Just19]

That particular disaster was during install, so yeah, I was root when I did it.   

The USB makes a good testing environment too.

Thanks .......  just trying to get things in perspective   

I was considering a USB with persistence as the testing environment .....  easy to revert to otiginal in case of such an event.

Last question for now - if I may - ......  is there a way to generate a spec file from an existing RPM, or does the SRPM have to exist to get the info?
I seem to have missed that info this time around, although I believe I remember reading it last year sometime .........   

EDIT ......  sorry about wandering off topic   

[Joble]

You need a src.rpm to get the spec file and sources.  Or, if you're really brave, you can try to write one from scratch.   

[Was_Just19]

You need a src.rpm to get the spec file.

Thank you.

[kjpetrie]

The "danger" is just that the more you have installed, the more likely you are to miss a dependency, so on a main install where you've got all sorts of stuff set up and working there's a high probability you'll miss something someone with a more minimal install will need as well.

It won't do any harm to build on a main install, but you have a greater chance of producing a broken package with a missing "BuildRequires:" line. Similarly, testing on anything more than the most minimum install means you are more likely to get away with a missing "Requires:" line.

It's about making sure you haven't already got something installed others might not have.

[Was_Just19]

The "danger" is just that the more you have installed, the more likely you are to miss a dependency, so on a main install where you've got all sorts of stuff set up and working there's a high probability you'll miss something someone with a more minimal install will need as well.

It won't do any harm to build on a main install, but you have a greater chance of producing a broken package with a missing "BuildRequires:" line. Similarly, testing on anything more than the most minimum install means you are more likely to get away with a missing "Requires:" line.

It's about making sure you haven't already got something installed others might not have.

Thank you.
Yes my intention would be to build on a main install and to test on a specific install with the minimum installed, which should suffice for the present .....  if the builds don't take too long