Can we make a non-relocatable RPM package relocatable during repackaging?
I am trying to install a package on a RHEL4 box, the package is non-relocatable.
I need it at a custom location because there are some other applications which need to be linked to it.
So I wonder if it is possible that to install the package to the default location, then remove it with the -e -repackage option and during this step make it relocatable.
If this can be done can you please specify what options should I be using?
If this is not possible can you please specify some other way?
linux rpm
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
add a comment |
I am trying to install a package on a RHEL4 box, the package is non-relocatable.
I need it at a custom location because there are some other applications which need to be linked to it.
So I wonder if it is possible that to install the package to the default location, then remove it with the -e -repackage option and during this step make it relocatable.
If this can be done can you please specify what options should I be using?
If this is not possible can you please specify some other way?
linux rpm
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
add a comment |
I am trying to install a package on a RHEL4 box, the package is non-relocatable.
I need it at a custom location because there are some other applications which need to be linked to it.
So I wonder if it is possible that to install the package to the default location, then remove it with the -e -repackage option and during this step make it relocatable.
If this can be done can you please specify what options should I be using?
If this is not possible can you please specify some other way?
linux rpm
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
I am trying to install a package on a RHEL4 box, the package is non-relocatable.
I need it at a custom location because there are some other applications which need to be linked to it.
So I wonder if it is possible that to install the package to the default location, then remove it with the -e -repackage option and during this step make it relocatable.
If this can be done can you please specify what options should I be using?
If this is not possible can you please specify some other way?
linux rpm
linux rpm
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
asked Feb 24 '13 at 6:19
user2028989user2028989
155
155
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Relocatable packages are deprecated, as they are of limited utility (and hard to create unless the code itself is really filessytem-position independent). Just installing, moving stuff around and packaging from there is unlikely to work (configuration files paths are hardwired into the executables, location of data files are fixed; and a lot of other things have to change). If the source uses the standard ./configure; make; make install dance, your best bet is to get the source RPM, install that one, hack the SPEC file to configure for an alternative location, and rebuild. Just make sure to check the dependencies of the package, and to give it a different name (e.g., package-localized) so it doesn't collide with the official one. Keep the SPEC file around, so you can recreate it whenever upstream updates the package.
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f556533%2fcan-we-make-a-non-relocatable-rpm-package-relocatable-during-repackaging%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Relocatable packages are deprecated, as they are of limited utility (and hard to create unless the code itself is really filessytem-position independent). Just installing, moving stuff around and packaging from there is unlikely to work (configuration files paths are hardwired into the executables, location of data files are fixed; and a lot of other things have to change). If the source uses the standard ./configure; make; make install dance, your best bet is to get the source RPM, install that one, hack the SPEC file to configure for an alternative location, and rebuild. Just make sure to check the dependencies of the package, and to give it a different name (e.g., package-localized) so it doesn't collide with the official one. Keep the SPEC file around, so you can recreate it whenever upstream updates the package.
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
add a comment |
Relocatable packages are deprecated, as they are of limited utility (and hard to create unless the code itself is really filessytem-position independent). Just installing, moving stuff around and packaging from there is unlikely to work (configuration files paths are hardwired into the executables, location of data files are fixed; and a lot of other things have to change). If the source uses the standard ./configure; make; make install dance, your best bet is to get the source RPM, install that one, hack the SPEC file to configure for an alternative location, and rebuild. Just make sure to check the dependencies of the package, and to give it a different name (e.g., package-localized) so it doesn't collide with the official one. Keep the SPEC file around, so you can recreate it whenever upstream updates the package.
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
add a comment |
Relocatable packages are deprecated, as they are of limited utility (and hard to create unless the code itself is really filessytem-position independent). Just installing, moving stuff around and packaging from there is unlikely to work (configuration files paths are hardwired into the executables, location of data files are fixed; and a lot of other things have to change). If the source uses the standard ./configure; make; make install dance, your best bet is to get the source RPM, install that one, hack the SPEC file to configure for an alternative location, and rebuild. Just make sure to check the dependencies of the package, and to give it a different name (e.g., package-localized) so it doesn't collide with the official one. Keep the SPEC file around, so you can recreate it whenever upstream updates the package.
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
Relocatable packages are deprecated, as they are of limited utility (and hard to create unless the code itself is really filessytem-position independent). Just installing, moving stuff around and packaging from there is unlikely to work (configuration files paths are hardwired into the executables, location of data files are fixed; and a lot of other things have to change). If the source uses the standard ./configure; make; make install dance, your best bet is to get the source RPM, install that one, hack the SPEC file to configure for an alternative location, and rebuild. Just make sure to check the dependencies of the package, and to give it a different name (e.g., package-localized) so it doesn't collide with the official one. Keep the SPEC file around, so you can recreate it whenever upstream updates the package.
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
answered Feb 24 '13 at 19:43
vonbrandvonbrand
1,99131417
1,99131417
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
add a comment |
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
Why do you say that relocatable packages are deprecated? Do you have a URL or source for that?
– Fredrik Wendt
Aug 14 '15 at 8:57
2
2
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
There is no reason whatsoever to claim that "relocatable packages are deprecated". This is false.
– Al Onestone
Mar 22 '16 at 16:16
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
Relocatable packages are "strongly discouraged" but not depreciated.
– fpmurphy
Oct 25 '18 at 3:50
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f556533%2fcan-we-make-a-non-relocatable-rpm-package-relocatable-during-repackaging%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
