[Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: relocatable package support

[<las...@Su...>]

Dan Mueth wrote:
> 
> A little bit of browsing around linux.redhat.rpm turned up
> RPM_INSTALL_PREFIX as the variable which stores the prefix which will be
> used.  I'm not sure if PREFIX is overwritten, but even if it is it should
> be easy enough to store it as another variable name.  So, let's assume we
> always have access to the default and relocated prefix.  (Here I'm
> assuming other packaging systems are at least as good as RPM ;)
> 
> I think two main systems have been proposed:
> 
> 1) Do not include the prefix in the OMF file until post-install time.  We
> won't need the pre-install step. At post-install time, the
> scrollkeeper-update-url script is run which modifies the OMF files and
> inserts the prefix into the URLs.  In this case, relocatable and
> non-relocatable packages are handled identically.
> 
> 2) Include the prefix in the OMF file with scrollkeeper-preinstall, as we
> do now.  For relocatable packages only, one adds an additional
> post-install call to a script, scrollkeeper-update-url, which replaces the
> unrelocated prefix with the relocated one.  In this case, unrelocated and
> relocated packages are still handled pretty much the same except that one
> (simple) extra line is added to the spec file.
> 
> I don't see any technical problems with either of these approaches.  (Does
> anybody?)
> 
> So, I'm inclined to use whichever one is simplest for package authors to
> understand and implement.  I think #1 is probably simpler even though it
> introduces a second post-install script, since it gets rid of
> scrollkeeper-preinstall and uses the same method for both relocatable and
> non-relocatable packages.
> 
> We could allow people to choose either of the two, but I think that just
> complicates things.
> 
> Dan

I prefer (1), it is simpler to implement and simpler to use.

Laszlo