Results 1 to 1 of 1
Hi all,
I am installing Linux from scratch, being a C/C++ programmer and all, so far things are picked up on the way quite well, and the system appears straightforward.
...
- 10-06-2007 #1Just Joined!
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Posts
- 24
Package management when building self from self obtained sources only.
Hi all,
I am installing Linux from scratch, being a C/C++ programmer and all, so far things are picked up on the way quite well, and the system appears straightforward.
However, i will be soon installing the basic system tools, like binutils, glibc, gcc and since i will be experimenting some with the system, i need a way to control the installation of the packages.
I am not sure what approach to software management i should choose. I do have terms i have to meet, so not all package management systems will suffice.
1. I am building all software i use from the sources, which i prefer obtaining from softwares developer, and not third party (possibly patched) repositories. I believe obtaining software from its original source (as in source of distribution and source code
is the best approach.
2. I will be installing software more often than i will be building it, but i will be building it myself like i mentioned, to optimise for my own architecture. So, packaging install files in a RPM/DEB is an option, although i am not sure how it all works.
Can you recommend how i proceed with this? I looked at some "creative" package management systems, like Package Users, and TRIP , and they offer a good way of checking what is installled, but i am not sure where systems like RPM/DEB fit into all this? After all, i DO NOT need to control the source files, as i will be putting them into separate directories, for different versions of the same software even. I am not sure if one can have several installed versions of the same software though, and if not, that is exactly what i need - a way of removing adding software versions on demand.
Am I making sense here ? I can explain further...
Thanks, sorry for the long post, there were nuances i had to mention...


Reply With Quote