Branches
Comments
[»]
Another mirror?
by mister - Jul 12th 2003 02:54:50
Hi, I have 250MB webspace with my hosting company, not sure if it would be
helpful, but this project is so helpful to me, would you like a mirror in
the UK?
[reply]
[top]
[»]
checkinstall feature request
by Eggert Ehmke - May 27th 2002 13:38:59
Hi, this is a really usefull program. Finally it's easy to build my own
rpm's. The only improvement I cant think of: the fields
"distribution", "vendor" and "packager"
should be configurable, with some senseful defaults.
Regards
Eggert
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Fixes and Comments
by Matthew Carpenter - May 6th 2003 10:22:04
Checkinstall is STILL one of the best additions to
any Linux-guru's utility belt.
I write my own spec files now, but only for things I
hope to distribute in large quantity and require total
control.
First comment: Perhaps a way to give Feedback,
without joining the email list. I'm already a member
of too many lists already.
Fix: rpmbuild is not a part of rpm and checkinstall
doesn't figure this out on my machines. I have to
change the script to us rpm instead of rpmbuild.
Suggestion: Have an option to "skip
/lib/modules/modules* files but instead add
"depmod" to the %post script. I have uninstalled
rpms and removed these files... DOH! Recovery
disk, please?
Suggestion: Check for files in a "lib" path and add
"ldconfig" to a %post script. Also could have an
option to Look for "*/lib/*" pathed files and add any
necessary paths to /etc/ld.so.conf before running
ldconfig.
Suggestion: Add an option to provide your own
>post script, as some commands make changes to
pre-existing config files that you don't want tied to
this RPM.
Thanks! Keep up the greate work!
--
Matthew Carpenter
CNI, CNE, CNA, J2CP, WP
Linux User #185986
Enterprise Information Systems
*Network Consulting, Integration & Support
*Web Development and E-Business
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Really user-friendly and administrator-friendly !
by ChTof - Nov 20th 2001 16:20:42
In good programs, you have a "make uninstall" to uninstall.
Unfortunately, it is not always the case... To keep for a long time
a clean system, the use of checkinstall is really a good idea !
It runs on my Mandrake 8.0.If you use Mandrake 8.0, don't
forget to install "rpm-build-4.0-26mdk.i586.rpm" and
"spec-helper-0.4-1mdk.noarch.rpm" before to install
checkinstall.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
that should be a standard
by Mariusz Gniazdowski - Sep 7th 2001 12:46:42
This program is just geat, very usefull etc. I didnt
used it for so big instalations as KDE so i cant tell
how does it work in that situations. Butt for all normal
instalations it works GREAT.
I think this program should be famous and included
in every distribution.
Life is just easy now :)
And sorry for my english ;)
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Excellent!
by Matthew Carpenter - Aug 19th 2001 23:22:26
It is wonderful to have such a need filled! RPM's are
much nicer to maintain my systems' clenliness, it does
a great job! A little old, since I'm still using 1.3.2
mostly, but the two additions I've seen which should be
handled are thus:
*older rpm uses "archtype" instead of "target"
*Caldera uses /usr/src/OpenLinux so add OpenLinux
on line 627 (along with redhat RedHat rpm RPM)
--
Matthew Carpenter
CNI, CNE, CNA, J2CP, WP
Linux User #185986
Enterprise Information Systems
*Network Consulting, Integration & Support
*Web Development and E-Business
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Checkinstall is nifty.
by Debian Drone - Aug 7th 2001 18:53:46
I have used 1.5.0beta1 for Debian with quite some success. Now I don't
fear tarballs anymore. I am able to install and uninstall compiled
binaries as Debian packages. It's easier to keep track of where everything
is going, and it makes for cleaner system. Debian users should definitely
check out checkinstall.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Good experience
by Emin - Jul 31st 2001 23:53:40
I downloaded the 1.4.1 and used it to on modutils-2.4.x, and gnosamba-0.3.3
sources.
After editing the checkinstallrc according to my taste (only the rpm
options line), it fly thru and I have a .i386.rpm file in
/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/ subdir & updated the existing. Overall it's a
good tool and I had good experience.
Just one glitch, it failed to do the same (as in modutils & gnosamba)
with samba-2.2.1a.tar.gz, because the 'make install' for this builds source
rpm. So, if checkinstall can diff source or binary rpm from 'make install',
this product is a full fledged packaging tool (or may be there is already a
command line option to overcome this sort of things)!!!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Good experience
by fyip - Dec 19th 2002 18:44:20
hi guys, sorry to ask another question here..i am looking for gnosamba, but
don't know where can download it. do you guys got any idea can help?
thanks
Frankie
> I downloaded the 1.4.1 and used it to on
> modutils-2.4.x, and gnosamba-0.3.3
> sources.
>
> After editing the checkinstallrc
> according to my taste (only the rpm
> options line), it fly thru and I have a
> .i386.rpm file in /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/
> subdir & updated the existing.
> Overall it's a good tool and I had good
> experience.
>
> Just one glitch, it failed to do the
> same (as in modutils & gnosamba)
> with samba-2.2.1a.tar.gz, because the
> 'make install' for this builds source
> rpm. So, if checkinstall can diff source
> or binary rpm from 'make install', this
> product is a full fledged packaging tool
> (or may be there is already a command
> line option to overcome this sort of
> things)!!!
[reply]
[top]
|
