Re: [OctDev] rpm packaging of octave packages

[Orion Poplawski]

On 12/21/2010 5:01 PM, Philip Nienhuis wrote:
> Perhaps no answer to your question but I can share some user experiences.
>
> This (warning messages) is what I also see when I try to 
> uninstall/install (renew/update) individual octave-forge packages in 
> Mandriva (2010.1).
> Mandriva has made renewal/updating individual octave-forge packages a 
> cumbersome process, with unexpected dependencies all over the place, 
> perhaps due to the still "monolithic" character of its octave-forge 
> rpm, and rpm and (octave's) pkg stepping onto each other's toes.
>
> Hopefully you can make it much easier for Fedora users, up to the 
> point that rpm isn't needed (or only needed for initial installation), 
> i.e., so that just Octave's pkg command will do. (I'd prefer pkg over 
> rpm in this case.)
> I think development of octave-forge packages proceeds more rapidly 
> than rpm's can be built, tested & updated - if you automate building 
> rpms from individual octave-forge packages this can be alleviated a bit.
> Thus either Q-control by Fedora will be hampered, or octave users will 
> be withheld a bit from trying the newest octave-forge packages (in 
> turn, hampering package development) if they must wait until tested 
> rpms become available.
>
> FYI, "pkg" has an option "forge" that will d/l & install octave-forge 
> packages directly from octave.sf.net. Permissions (root) may interfere 
> when packages go into /usr/[local/]share, but that's probably resolvable.
>
> P.
I think the monolithic octave-forge package has proved to be too 
cumbersome.  Individual packages should be easier to maintain.  Updates 
to packages can be done quite quickly.  However, nothing in the rpm 
octave package prevents anyone from using the pkg command directly, and 
is in fact probably the way to go for individual users.   For managed 
environments though, it more convenient to install packages 
automatically via the distributions packaging methods.

- Orion