[WBEL-devel] Choosing a RHEL rebuild project

[Kevin Ediger]

John Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Kevin Ediger wrote:
> 
> 
>>If anyone is interested, I have a WBEL build script (actually, a makefile). 
>>It builds far enough to use as a network install but doesn't generate the 
>>individual CDROM images since I always use the boot.iso CDROM or PXE and 
>>install using NFS. I've incorporated the issues that have been discussed on 
>>this list as far as I can tell. I don't have RHAS3, so I don't know how the 
>>packages compare to RedHat's packages.
>>
>>ftp://odyssey.licor.com/whitebox/build
> 
> 
> Just had a look at your script.  Looks like you have used make a lot more
> than I have, but I have a few questions/comments anyway.

I build Linux distributions for embedded Xscale systems. I've found make to 
be indispensible, especially while tweeking the build process since you can 
always start from where you left off.

> Can't see where you are catching the packages that need to be built as
> root.  Those are kdenetwork, ghostscript, isdn4k-utils, rpm and tcpdump.  
> Although some of those might be caused instead by the user rpm build
> environment that I got from somewhere on people.redhat.com that is a bit
> mutant, kdenetwork for sure needs to build as root.

The only packages I'm building as root are the comps file and rpmdb. Do you 
know what kind of problems occur if they aren't built as root? I saw your 
note about tcpdump needing to be built as root and so I went and tested my 
installation. It seemed to work fine. But then again, I don't have RHEL 
binaries to compare against, so I don't know for sure.

I do know that all the packages build without errors as non-root.

> WBEL3 includes i586 versions of the kernel and glibc but I manually hack
> the spec and build them since I didn't want to issue a -WB package for
> such a minor tweak that 99% of users don't need anyway.  However an athlon
> kernel is present in RHEL3 so it's absence is at least a buglet.

That's easy to add to the Makefile. Just duplicate the i686 build rule, only 
switch the i686 to athlon. I'll add that and update my ftp.

> I'm already grabbing openoffice.org-1.1.0-6.WB1.src.rpm.  I will be
> needing OOo 1.1 and no sense reinventing that wheel.  

That is essentially openoffice.org-1.1.0-6.src.rpm from fedora. 
Unfortunately, they included a build switch in the SPEC file that determines 
if the package is being built for taroon, shrike, or fedora. I couldn't 
figure out a way to change the build switch from the command line. So, I had 
to make a very minor tweak to the SPEC file.

> Your notes say a
> newer lizard is required to build it but I didn't see that package.  
> Rpmfind only returns a mozilla-1.4.1 package for ASPLinux.

I used the updated mozilla-1.4.1-18.src.rpm from fedora.

http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/1/SRPMS/mozilla-1.4.1-18.src.rpm

Best Regards,
-Kevin