Board:   [WWIVnet] WWIV Networking
Subject: Re: Filename suggestions (8.3) for WWIV 5?
From:    Granitepenguin #1 @90
To:      Rushfan #1 @513
Date:    Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:27

R> Rushfan #1 @513 Sun Jun 7 08:53:43 2020 RE: Re: Filename
R> suggestions (8.3) for WWIV 5? BY: Xenos #1 @60
R>
R>  X> Easy answer. Don't use ZIP for Linux archives. ;)
R>  X>
R>  X> Use .TGZ for source tarball RPM for RedHat/CentOS  s.
R>  X> Use .package DEB for Debian package                s.
R>
R> Ohhh.. that's hot (and makes an enormous amount of sense).
R> Anyone here have experience on making deb and rpm packages?
R> Also sounds like I should write this up on the wiki.

Hmm.. yeah, that might work, but it's not as simple as just
changing the extension.  I've never done a .deb file before,
but I've done a few rpm builds.

This is a decent overview of the rpm process
https://tecadmin.net/create-rpm-of-your-own-script-in-centosredhat/

There are a lot more detailed documents out there, obviously, but
this is good "bare-bones" starter.  Other things to consider; GPG
signing vs not, how much automation to bake in, etc.

Here's the main doc from the Fedora Project on building RPMs:
https://tinyurl.com/y9dwulzx

The biggest issue is going to be doing them in a way that
actually works.  These aren't just packages of files; they assume
a lot about install locations, file ownerships, etc that we'd
need to validate and standardize.  I'm not as concerned about the
initial install as I am about maintaining the packages in a
meaningful way for upgrades later.  Doing that properly is
non-trivial.  I assume .deb packages are pretty much the same
list of issues.

IF you went this route, I'd want them to be _actual_ packages,
that basically do everything the install.sh currently does, and
properly handles upgrades; otherwise, there's really no point.

--
GranitePenguin

 _-----_
/(^)_(^)\  The Wretched Beagle - Re-established 2014
|\_/#\_/|       telnet://bbs.wretchedbeagle.com
\_/\-/\_/
.