RE: Eval'd class to detect installed packages...

[Villalovos, John L]

Thanks.

I am using the latest stable 2.0.6 version.

I appreciate it.

John

John Villalovos

My opinions are my own and NEVER the opinions of Intel Corporation.  I
am but a tiny, insignificant, infinitesimal (1/80000) cog in the giant
machine of Intel :)  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil D'Amore [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 2:17 PM
> To: Villalovos, John L
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Eval'd class to detect installed packages...
> 
> 
> Woah.  Sorry about this.  I've been so sidetracked lately that I have 
> not had a chance to work through this in a way that pleases everyone 
> (never had any takers for helping me get it to work on debian 
> either).  
> What cfengine version do you need it for, I will re-generate it for 
> you.  Also before I send it out, I want to change the name to 
> HasPackage 
> and loose the RPM, in case I ever do get time to make it 
> compatible with 
> other formats.
> 
> Villalovos, John L wrote:
> 
> >Is it possible to get a copy of this patch?
> >
> >Also are there any plans to include this patch in the base 
> distribution
> >of cfengine?
> >
> >Personally I think this would be useful.
> >
> >I realize that I can use something like:
> >
> >     hasUp2date = ( ReturnsZero(rpm -q --quiet up2date) )
> >
> >But I kind of like the idea of a built in method :)
> >
> >Thanks,
> >John
> >
> >John Villalovos
> >
> >My opinions are my own and NEVER the opinions of Intel 
> Corporation.  I
> >am but a tiny, insignificant, infinitesimal (1/80000) cog in 
> the giant
> >machine of Intel :)  
> >
> >  
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Phil D'Amore [mailto:address@hidden 
> >>Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 8:50 AM
> >>To: address@hidden; address@hidden
> >>Subject: Eval'd class to detect installed packages...
> >>
> >>
> >>Hello...
> >>
> >>I currently have a patch against 2.0.5pre2 that creates a new 
> >>evaluated 
> >>class that allows one to determine if a given package is 
> >>installed on a 
> >>system.  I only have RPMs to deal with here so the class 
> >>turned out to be
> >>
> >>RPMHasPackage ( <name> <relop> <[epoch:]version[-release]>)
> >>
> >>Where <relop> is just the usual combinations of <, >, and =.
> >>
> >>My intentions at the moment were to be able to allow cfengine 
> >>to detect whether packages needed to be installed, and to 
> >>alter what was done based on the version of an existing package.
> >>
> >>After showing this to Mark, he wondered if it could be made 
> >>more generic, to allow for the same thing with debian 
> >>packages.  My immediate thought was to rename the class 
> >>simply HasPackage, keeping the syntax.  Some issues I am 
> >>looking for thoughts on:
> >>
> >>1.  Is anyone interested in this?  Is it worth my time to 
> >>make this work, or should I just go away and mind my own business?
> >>
> >>Assumung #1 is yes, some other issues...
> >>
> >>2.  RPM has a 3 part "version", with an epoch, a version, and 
> >>a release.  Dpkg seems to have a version and a release.  In 
> >>practice I would imagine it would be fine to just drop the 
> >>epoch from the version string if it is passed in and we are 
> >>debian.  Perhaps warn in the debug output.
> >>
> >>3.  Building in the support.  I see 2 ways to do this.  First 
> >>and probably easiest is that you get one package system per 
> >>binary.  That is, you tell configure which package system you 
> >>want and it makes you a binary with the right code.  This is 
> >>fine for folks who package cfengine like me, since you can 
> >>have a debian package for debian boxes and a red hat package 
> >>for red hat boxes, each with the proper support.  If there 
> >>are folks doing this sort of thing with all linux boxes on a 
> >>NFS mount that could be an issue.  The other alternative to 
> >>accomodate that is to create a binary that dlopen()s the 
> >>proper libs at runtime based on the running OS.  I've never 
> >>done that before, however.  The one caveat I can see there is 
> >>your build host needs to have both rpm and dpkg libs (or at 
> >>least headers) to make the build work for both.
> >>
> >>4.  Not a big issue, but I have no idea how to make this work 
> >>for dpkg.  If anyone knows how to easily do this for dpkg, 
> >>input from you would be most appreciated :).  A quick search 
> >>for docs on the API yesterday did not turn up much.
> >>
> >>Sorry for the length.  Anyone with thoughts on what the Right 
> >>Thing should be?  I currently lurk on bug-cfengine but not 
> >>help-cfengine, so if writing to the latter, please Cc: me.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>
> >>-- 
> >>Phil D'Amore                             "Y'know, there was a 
> >>time when
> >>Senior System Administrator               corporate 
> >>responsibility meant
> >>Red Hat, Inc                              having the decency 
> >>to jump out of
> >>Office: 919.754.3700 x44395               a window when you 
> >>got caught"
> >>Cell:   919.641.3669                         -- Non-Sequitur, 
> >>09/30/2002
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Help-cfengine mailing list
> >>address@hidden
> >>http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> 
> -- 
> Phil D'Amore                             "Sometimes there is 
> a fine line
> Senior System Administrator               between criminally abusive
> Red Hat, Inc                              behavior and fun."
> Office: 919.754.3700 x44395                 -- Ted the Generic Guy
> Cell:   919.641.3669                           (Dilbert 4/19/2003)
> 
>