Ben Walton wrote: > The only changes I've made (taken from the fc6.src.rpm) are in the > initial detection of which linux/rpm-based distro it's being built on. > This allows detection of gcc version, pdfviewer, etc. These changes are > all similar to what happens in the fc line of detection, but weren't > being done for rhel.
Yes, those sounds reasonable. > Without modification, rpmbuild was looking for XFree86-devel and gcc-g77 > which aren't valid packages in rhel5 (haven't looked at 4 as rpms were > already built for that). yes and no. You can do "rpmbuild --nodeps <otherstuff>" without modifying the spec file to tell rpmbuild to go ahead, I think. This is also often the technique used when one tries to build rpm's on non-rpm based systems like debian/gentoo/slackware. > I am aware of fedora extras but haven't gotten to the point of using > them in rhel (we do in our fc installs). Personally, I'd prefer to stay > away from the fc rpm trees when possible as (being a devel distro) > versions can change wildly and bugs are more likely to crop up in > packaging, etc (we've been bitten in the past). I'm moving away from fc > for production machines for this reason. I prefer fewer surprises in > production machines when possible. Personally, I think EL4 is too old/conservative (and I don't have access to EL5), and it makes me angry when I encounter a bug or limitation that I know was already fixed/addressed a year or two ago. Can't win. :-). HTL ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
