[RULE] no recompilation of rpm needed?

[M. Fioretti]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 07:10:03 AM -0600, smooge at mindspring.com
 smooge at mindspring.com  wrote:

> >In this case there would be no need at all to recompile some custom
> >version of rpm for slinky.
> >
> >What do you think?
> 
> I think the main issue that may come up is that a lot of RPM/RH/SuSE is 
> being aimed at mainline hardware versus lowend hardware. The version of 
> RPM that you going to use is still going to use the latest glibc/db4 and 
> threading code that really need more umph(CPU/memory) than a low-end box 
> has.

OK, but if this only means that installation with slinky is going to
be slow, nobody would really complain, as long as it's possible. We
started RULE when Anaconda started to _abort_ on little ram, not to be
slow.

What are the real requirements of rpm to _run_?

> It may be better to stick/branch with an older version of RPM and
> just use it as the base for compiling for all the packages.

OK, as long as we replace "compiling" with "installing". The whole
point of the exercise is to end up, no matter how, with the same end
user packages as FCn.

Ciao,
	Marco

-- 
Marco Fioretti                    mfioretti, at the server mclink.it
Red Hat & Fedora for low memory   http://www.rule-project.org/

I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the
set, I go into the other room and read a book.      - Groucho Marx

_______________________________________________
Original home page of the RULE project: www.rule-project.org
Rule-list at rule-project.org
http://rita.choice-secure.com/mailman/listinfo/rule-list_rule-project.org