From: Bruce Momjian Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:56:40 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Update FAQ_DEV. X-Git-Tag: REL9_0_0~18934 X-Git-Url: http://git.osdn.net/view?a=commitdiff_plain;h=b7ca9a9403f9cd597899e4ffa06ed6e6afb00c2c;p=pg-rex%2Fsyncrep.git Update FAQ_DEV. --- diff --git a/doc/src/FAQ/FAQ_DEV.html b/doc/src/FAQ/FAQ_DEV.html index 94306bdbe4..f3519893b6 100644 --- a/doc/src/FAQ/FAQ_DEV.html +++ b/doc/src/FAQ/FAQ_DEV.html @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ 12) How do I add a new port?
13) What is CommandCounterIncrement()?
14) Why don't we use threads in the backend?
+ 15) How are RPM's packaged?


@@ -68,7 +69,8 @@ ccsym find standard defines made by your compiler entab converts tabs to spaces, used by pgindent find_static finds functions that could be made static - find_typedef get a list of typedefs in the source code + find_typedef finds a list of typedefs in the source code + find_badmacros finds macros that use braces incorrectly make_ctags make vi 'tags' file in each directory make_diff make *.orig and diffs of source make_etags make emacs 'etags' files @@ -539,6 +541,99 @@
  • The backend code would be more complex.
  • + +

    15) How are RPM's packaged?

    + +

    This is from Lamar Owen:

    +
    +As to how the RPMs are built -- to answer that question sanely requires
    +me to know how much experience you have with the whole RPM paradigm. 
    +'How is the RPM built?' is a multifaceted question.  The obvious simple
    +answer is that I maintain:
    +	1.)	A set of patches to make certain portions of the source
    +		tree 'behave' in the different environment of the RPMset;
    +	2.)	The initscript;
    +	3.)	Any other ancilliary scripts and files;
    +	4.)	A README.rpm-dist document that tries to adequately document
    +		both the differences between the RPM build and the WHY of the
    +		differences, as well as useful RPM environment operations
    +		(like, using syslog, upgrading, getting postmaster to
    +		start at OS boot, etc);
    +	5.)	The spec file that throws it all together.  This is not a 
    +		trivial undertaking in a package of this size.
    +
    +I then download and build on as many different canonical distributions
    +as I can -- currently I am able to build on Red Hat 6.2, 7.0, and 7.1 on
    +my personal hardware.  Occasionally I receive opportunity from certain
    +commercial enterprises such as Great Bridge and PostgreSQL Inc to build
    +on other distributions.  
    +
    +I test the build by installing the resulting packages and running the
    +regression tests.  Once the build passes these tests, I upload to the
    +postgresql.org ftp server and make a release announcement.  I am also
    +responsible for maintaining the RPM download area on the ftp site.
    +
    +You'll notice I said 'canonical' distributions above.  That simply means
    +that the machine is as stock 'out of the box' as practical -- that is,
    +everything (except select few programs) on these boxen are installed by
    +RPM; only official Red Hat released RPMs are used (except in unusual
    +circumstances involving software that will not alter the build -- for
    +example, installing a newer non-RedHat version of the Dia diagramming
    +package is OK -- installing Python 2.1 on the box that has Python 1.5.2
    +installed is not, as that alters the PostgreSQL build).  The RPM as
    +uploaded is built to as close to out-of-the-box pristine as is
    +possible.  Only the standard released 'official to that release'
    +compiler is used -- and only the standard official kernel is used as
    +well.
    +
    +For a time I built on Mandrake for RedHat consumption -- no more. 
    +Nonstandard RPM building systems are worse than useless.  Which is not
    +to say that Mandrake is useless!  By no means is Mandrake useless --
    +unless you are building Red Hat RPMs -- and Red Hat is useless if you're
    +trying to build Mandrake or SuSE RPMs, for that matter.  But I would be
    +foolish to use 'Lamar Owen's Super Special RPM Blend Distro 0.1.2' to
    +build for public consumption! :-)
    +
    +I _do_ attempt to make the _source_ RPM compatible with as many
    +distributions as possible -- however, since I have limited resources (as
    +a volunteer RPM maintainer) I am limited as to the amount of testing
    +said build will get on other distributions, architectures, or systems.  
    +
    +And, while I understand people's desire to immediately upgrade to the
    +newest version, realize that I do this as a side interest -- I have a
    +regular, full-time job as a broadcast
    +engineer/webmaster/sysadmin/Technical Director which occasionally
    +prevents me from making timely RPM releases. This happened during the
    +early part of the 7.1 beta cycle -- but I believe I was pretty much on
    +the ball for the Release Candidates and the final release.
    +
    +I am working towards a more open RPM distribution -- I would dearly love
    +to more fully document the process and put everything into CVS -- once I
    +figure out how I want to represent things such as the spec file in a CVS
    +form.  It makes no sense to maintain a changelog, for instance, in the
    +spec file in CVS when CVS does a better job of changelogs -- I will need
    +to write a tool to generate a real spec file from a CVS spec-source file
    +that would add version numbers, changelog entries, etc to the result
    +before building the RPM.  IOW, I need to rethink the process -- and then
    +go through the motions of putting my long RPM history into CVS one
    +version at a time so that version history information isn't lost.
    +
    +As to why all these files aren't part of the source tree, well, unless
    +there was a large cry for it to happen, I don't believe it should. 
    +PostgreSQL is very platform-agnostic -- and I like that.  Including the
    +RPM stuff as part of the Official Tarball (TM) would, IMHO, slant that
    +agnostic stance in a negative way.  But maybe I'm too sensitive to
    +that.  I'm not opposed to doing that if that is the consensus of the
    +core group -- and that would be a sneaky way to get the stuff into CVS
    +:-).  But if the core group isn't thrilled with the idea (and my
    +instinct says they're not likely to be), I am opposed to the idea -- not
    +to keep the stuff to myself, but to not hinder the platform-neutral
    +stance. IMHO, of course.  
    +
    +Of course, there are many projects that DO include all the files
    +necessary to build RPMs from their Official Tarball (TM).
    +
    +