Hi,
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Sure, can you comment on the best approach? Are the names of the
> > binaries hardcoded everywhere?
> >
> > Would shipping a libapt and binaries in a non-standard prefix be
> > acceptable? e.g. --libdir /usr/lib/apt-rpm.
> >
> >
Loïc Minier wrote:
> Sure, can you comment on the best approach? Are the names of the
> binaries hardcoded everywhere?
>
> Would shipping a libapt and binaries in a non-standard prefix be
> acceptable? e.g. --libdir /usr/lib/apt-rpm.
>
> I can easily change mach to use a different apt-get th
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Could you please enable the currently commented out apt-rpm-client
> > package? It would probably require modification to install binaries
> > with different names, or in a different directory.
> The renaming of the binaries will likely require
Loïc Minier wrote:
> Could you please enable the currently commented out apt-rpm-client
> package? It would probably require modification to install binaries
> with different names, or in a different directory.
The renaming of the binaries will likely require some extensive work
which I can't
Package: apt-rpm
Severity: wishlist
Version: 0.5.15lorg3.2-1
Hi,
I'm packaging "mach", a tool to create chroots of RPM based
distributions. It has two modes of operation, APT and Yum. APT is the
preferred mode, and Yum support is currently not fully possible for
other reasons.
Cou
5 matches
Mail list logo
