[mythtv-users] 2rpm or not 2rpm, that is the question (was: Updated MythTV RPMs)

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
Sat Feb 15 11:02:07 UTC 2003


Cedar,

why so hostile with rpms? They don't bite ... ;)

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:28:13PM -0800, Cedar McKay wrote:
> why would you want to use the rpms in this situation? You are just adding
> another layer of complexity and potential screwups to an already complicated
> install process. [...]
> [...] Just follow along, and when you get to mythtv it is a simple configure,
> make, make install. [...]

Now is setting up mythtv "a complicated process" or a "simple configure, make,
make install" (rhetorical)?

You should ask yourself the purpose of rpms (or of Debian dpkg or any
packaging system). And not only for mythtv, but also for anything else: They
should ease the installation and setup of software and deal with
dependencies. They don't suggest replacing documentation!

Especially multimedia applications like mythtv and mplayer are targeted (also)
for average users, that should not have to be software gurus or be able to
follow a rather technical setup and possibly deal with problems that are not
covered.

rpms/dpkgs do raise the acceptance and usage of any software bit.

> In my opinion there are too many things that rpms (probably) don't take into
> account here.

Instead of guessing and spreading FUD, you should check - you are running
RH8.0 yourself, so it would only have taken a minute ...

As you know everything is technically possible in the framework of rpms/dpkgs,
so it is not a question about packaging or not, it is a question of their
quality.

Don't drive people away from the packaging concept. Try instead to be
constructive. If you do find true shortcomings in the packages you should
suggest improvements.

> For instance, does your rpm know that libexpat is broken in RH8?

Yes. It will whine about the broken expat and require you or any automated
packaging framework to install the working version. In the automated variant
(e.g. apt-get) it will even suggest to get it for you and install it. You will
only have to approve.

Surprised? Yes, packaging managers do have some intelligence ...

> Does your rpm set the LANG variable to "us"?

No, you know it should not (although it could)!

> Or know that sometimes you have to run ldconfig multiple times?

Yes, again ...

> Or that sometimes you do need to recompile the kernel to get lirc running
> and sometimes you don't.

You must be kidding.

Your denial against packaging software is remarkable. Next thing you will
suggest is reformating our hard disks and go Linux From Scratch.

> And then you won't have to tear _your_ hair out bumbling around with rpms
> made by who knows who, and inventing new problems that nobody really wants
> to solve.
> 
> ahhhh that felt good

This sounds too personal for me to go on.

If you feel like the rpms needing improvement your comments are welcome. I
am really not fond of flaming, ranting and politics.

> cedar
-- 
Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20030215/5c0da0d3/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list