Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (113 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] BS provides no benefit for me
  • From: Christoph Thiel <cthiel@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 14:01:32 +0200 (CEST)
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605291348090.3051@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, 29 May 2006, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> (moving this thread from smart-maintainers to opensuse-buildservice, I
> think its content is more relevant here ;))


> >> 2) I preconfigure my smart package with a lot of channel files,
> >> including packman and guru so... legal issues ?
> >
> > Indeed -- but I'd rather split those channel files into a new package and
> > have smart depend on it (or suggest it). I might even be able to put a
> > channel package into SUSE Linux, with a reduced set of channels.
> Mmmmmyeah, that would be a technical option, but not a good thing for
> end-users IMO. When I look at the current situation with 10.1 and its
> broken zypp, end-users are already struggling to install my smart RPM
> (mostly because it depends on rpm-python, that is not installed by
> default) and have to jump a few hoops because YaST2 or rug just won't
> work on their system:
> So adding another package/dependency would make things even more
> complex.
> And from a technical POV, if I put those channels into, say,
> smart-suse-channels.rpm, you can't really make smart.rpm depend on it
> because smart-suse-channels.rpm won't be in the Build Service.

So, why would users want to install your smart package, instead of going
for the one that's already in the distribution? Only because of the
preconfigured channels?

Installing the SUSE smart package (+requirements), after doing a default
CD / DVD or network installation, should be working without any problems,
even with libzypp.

To solve the channel Problem, we should look into registering a mime-type
for .channel (or .repo) files, to handle them with a helper script when
$users tries to access them.

> I don't want to discard or discredit your efforts on the BuildService,
> but I really don't see any advantage for me in using it at the moment,
> it's rather the opposite:
> - I build for SUSE 9.1 -> 10.1, and only 10.0, 10.1 and Factory are in
> the BS as of now (AFAIK)

9.3 has been added recently. [9.1 has just been official discontinued and
Adrian is telling me, that 9.2 won't be added to the Build Serivce,
right?) CORE9 (SLES9 / NLD9) might be an interesting target in the

> What would make the BS more compelling to me would be to have a ppc
> build target (and providing what I'm missing, above ;)).

+1 ;)


< Previous Next >
Follow Ups