5:27 a.m.
Well, I had a quick glance through my notes and I think I will try to start
on:
3. What is needed to re-build anaconda (disk space, packages) (requirements)
7. Set up your build environment (tree structures needed and so on)
and
9. Step by step walkthrough the whole buildinstall process (since I just
went through the whole thing!)
But I will wait till we are approved at sourceforge and until Taylor had a
chance to improve the TOC.
I will also try to contact Brian to see if we could mention his
kickstart-tools that were so valuable for making my distro.
AR
8:16 a.m.
I have started on a topic for the anaconda-docs:
=============================================================
Rebuilding source RPMS mini how-to (Taylor, you will recognize most of your
work is from you in here!)
When attempting to make changes to the anaconda source (and other source
packages) there are two ways to do this: patching or untar/tar.
1. Patching source rpms
First, install the src.rpm and build it with any patches already included:
rpm -ivh anaconda-9.0-4.src.rpm
cd /usr/src/redhat/SPEC
rpmbuild -bp anaconda.spec
Now, go to the BUILD directory and make an original copy of the source
directory.
cd /usr/src/redhat/BUILD
cp -a anaconda-9.0 anaconda-9.0.orig
Then go to the anaconda-9.0 directory and make any changes that you deem
necessary. Once you are finished, make a patch of the differences between
the two (make sure you are in the BUILD directory):
diff -urN anaconda-9.0.orig anaconda-9.0 > ../SOURCES/my-changes.patch
Now edit the spec file and rebuild:
cd /usr/src/redhat/SPECS
gedit anaconda-9.0
under Source: anaconda-%{PACKAGE_VERSION}.tar.bz2, add this line:
Patch1: my-changes.patch
under %setup -q, add this line:
%patch1 -p1
under %changelog, add a few lines stating what changes you made.
The first line should be date/name/email, the following lines
should be about the changes that you made.
Save the file, and run:
rpmbuild -ba anaconda.spec (make sure you are in /usr/src/redhat/SPECS)
which will create a new src.rpm (in /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS), as well as the
binary i386.rpm files (in /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386).
2. The untar/tar way
The second method involves untarring the source, retarring it and rebuilding
the rpm:
cd /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES
tar xjvf anaconda-9.0.tar.bz2
<edit changes in anaconda-9.0/>
tar cjvf anaconda-9.0.tar.bz2 anaconda-9.0
cd /usr/src/redhat/SPEC
rpmbuild -ba anaconda.spec
This method is probably simpler for the newbie, but it lacks the portability
of the patch method.
The advantage of the patching method is that this means that it is easier to
send out a patch to others than it is to send out the src.rpm file. It is
also easier when the next version of anaconda comes out to port patches over
to the new release (if it hasn't been fixed in the newer version). Most
people start out using the tar method, and found that it was much easier to
use patches. Often you have to make changes to a newer version, and
forgotten exactly what had been done in the source. Now, you can just look
at the patches, and copy them over to the newer version.
==================================================================
What do you guys think?
AR
Alexander Rau, Dipl.-Betriebswirt, A+, MCP, MCSA, MCSE, CISSP
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-docs-list-admin(a)redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-docs-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Alexander Rau (work)
Sent: 21 November 2003 06:28
To: fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: anaconda documentation topics
Well, I had a quick glance through my notes and I think I will try to start
on:
3. What is needed to re-build anaconda (disk space, packages) (requirements)
7. Set up your build environment (tree structures needed and so on)
and
9. Step by step walkthrough the whole buildinstall process (since I just
went through the whole thing!)
But I will wait till we are approved at sourceforge and until Taylor had a
chance to improve the TOC.
I will also try to contact Brian to see if we could mention his
kickstart-tools that were so valuable for making my distro.
AR
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
12:32 p.m.
On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 06:16, Alexander Rau (work) wrote:
I have started on a topic for the anaconda-docs:
2. The untar/tar way
What do you guys think?
AR
Looks good. One question though--do we even want to mention the
untar/tar method? It is probably easier for the novice, but I think
that we should be encouraging better methods. It may also be confusing
to the novice to try to read both methods and then decide which one to
use. I vote for the patch method. What do you all think?
Forrest
--
6:47 a.m.
On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 13:32, Taylor, ForrestX wrote:
On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 06:16, Alexander Rau (work) wrote:
> I have started on a topic for the anaconda-docs:
>
> 2. The untar/tar way
>
> What do you guys think?
Looks good. One question though--do we even want to mention the
untar/tar method? It is probably easier for the novice, but I think
that we should be encouraging better methods. It may also be confusing
to the novice to try to read both methods and then decide which one to
use. I vote for the patch method. What do you all think?
I agree that the patch method is the superior one. One thing you might
also want to include is giving the user info on customizing %release to
keep their custom RPMs distinct from the original Fedora versions. Just
a thought....
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE
10:33 a.m.
Looks good. One question though--do we even want to mention the
untar/tar method? It is probably easier for the novice, but I think
that we should be encouraging better methods. It may also be confusing
to the novice to try to read both methods and then decide which one to
use. I vote for the patch method. What do you all think?
Patch.
/Brian/
--
Brian Long <brilong(a)cisco.com>
Cisco Systems
10:47 a.m.
Patch vs. tar/untar method:
Now that I have gone through the building process I have to agree with you
guys that the patch method is the one to go with.
However, when I was standing at the bottom of this high mountain I wanted to
climb, I appreciated having both alternatives available to me (especially
the tar/untar method made the mountain look a bit smaller).
I also appreciated the explanation between the two methods Taylor offered,
which then helped me to make a decision between the two (and this helped me
understand the processes better, which I think should also be a goal of our
how-to, not just a simple follow line by line recipe to make your own distro
but provide learning options and understanding on how the install process
really works!)
Anyways, I assume that this is a democratic project and if it comes to a
vote a will vote for the patch method for all the earlier mentioned reasons.
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-docs-list-admin(a)redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-docs-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Brian Long
Sent: 24 November 2003 11:34
To: fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: RE: anaconda documentation topics
Looks good. One question though--do we even want to mention the
untar/tar method? It is probably easier for the novice, but I think
that we should be encouraging better methods. It may also be confusing
to the novice to try to read both methods and then decide which one to
use. I vote for the patch method. What do you all think?
Patch.
/Brian/
--
Brian Long <brilong(a)cisco.com>
Cisco Systems
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
7459
days inactive
7462
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Alexander Rau (work) -
Brian Long (brilong) -
Paul W. Frields -
Taylor, ForrestX