Fedora's Amanda mispackaged? (was: Re: Backing up whole system)

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 14:06 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> My tarball's (for amanda) are always installed in /usr/local/*, your present 
> rpms obviously do not, making a quick and dirty compatibility test less than 
> useful as was shown before in this thread.
> 
> Many of amanda's options are in fact made at ./configure time, before make is 
> invoked and no pre-built rpm will ever match that level of versatility.
> 
> Blind insistence that rpm is the best solution is equ to saying that one 
> religion is the only true religion.  But we aren't into stoning for blasphemy, 
> so we'll just agree to disagree.  See you (Michael Schwendt) on that list 
> maybe, rather than boring this much busier list with what is to me and most 
> other readers here, a useless diatribe about how perfect rpm is?  ISTM that 
> you are more interested in seeing to it that nothing 'contaminates' the fedora 
> legal climate than in seeing to it I can watch news videos with firefox.
----
since the rpm building process also builds from source and
configure/Makefile options apply there is no fundamental difference
between building from source or building an rpm except for the fact that
building with rpm actually gives you package management.

The fact that you left your built from source tarballs in place
in /usr/local/... simply meant that unless you were absolutely careful
in invoking the specific binary & config files from the rpm
installation, you were going to fail. Blaming rpm for this failure
simply disregards your own lack of anticipation of what would happen.

Building rpm's as opposed to compiling and installing from source
tarballs isn't a religious debate. It's simply a recognition that Red
Hat/Fedora is now and has always been a package management installation
and at the moment you step outside the lines, you become responsible for
the inconsistent behavior that you create. While it may be reasonable
for you to operate in this manner, it's irresponsible to suggest that
others follow your methods.

Craig


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.