Comments on: RPM 5.1 released http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/ Ralf S. Engelschall's Train of Thoughts Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:18:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: devzero2000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-24797 devzero2000 Fri, 09 May 2008 20:57:47 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-24797 Ok, well. I am writing an introduttory article on rpm5 and the story...... I tell you when . In the meantime i like to pubblish some material on rpm5.info. With some help, i am sure....... Ok, well. I am writing an introduttory article on rpm5 and the story……

I tell you when .

In the meantime i like to pubblish some material on rpm5.info. With some
help, i am sure…….

]]> By: Jeff Johnson http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-24094 Jeff Johnson Thu, 01 May 2008 12:42:59 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-24094 Re: comment 4: I said that the rate of adoption of rpm-5.1 is independent of the existence (or not) of documentation. That's a very different statement than "Documentation is not missing." or "Documentation is not needed." There is a wiki already at http://rpm5.info. Re: comment 4: I said that the rate of adoption of rpm-5.1 is independent of the existence (or not) of documentation. That’s a very different statement than “Documentation is not missing.” or “Documentation is not needed.”

There is a wiki already at http://rpm5.info.

]]> By: Suso Banderas http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-22388 Suso Banderas Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:42:15 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-22388 Or perhaps the nature of packages (used by many, developed by few) doesn't support the economics of making a book. Perhaps what is needed is a good wiki. rpmwiki.com exists, but isn't used much and doesn't have any information about specfiles, etc. I think rpmwiki.com is only trying to approach it from a user perspective. Or perhaps the nature of packages (used by many, developed by few) doesn’t support the economics of making a book. Perhaps what is needed is a good wiki. rpmwiki.com exists, but isn’t used much and doesn’t have any information about specfiles, etc. I think rpmwiki.com is only trying to approach it from a user perspective.

]]> By: Ralf S. Engelschall http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-22357 Ralf S. Engelschall Tue, 15 Apr 2008 06:08:25 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-22357 devzero2000: You mean Jeff doesn't think documentation is missing? Well, perhaps from his personal perspective this might be correct (he knows RPM inside-out). Sure, most things are documented somewhere, but it is had to locate this documentation. And he certainly will agree that lots of new RPM 5 features are hard to determine by the average RPM user because of the lack of single-place consistent and up-to-date documentation. So, I think there is a strong need for something like an RPM handbook... devzero2000: You mean Jeff doesn’t think documentation is missing? Well, perhaps from his personal perspective this might be correct (he knows RPM inside-out). Sure, most things are documented somewhere, but it is had to locate this documentation. And he certainly will agree that lots of new RPM 5 features are hard to determine by the average RPM user because of the lack of single-place consistent and up-to-date documentation. So, I think there is a strong need for something like an RPM handbook…

]]> By: devzero2000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-22322 devzero2000 Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:46:27 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-22322 Hmm. I agreed with you but Jeff doesn't, do you know....... Hmm. I agreed with you but Jeff
doesn’t, do you know…….

]]> By: Ralf S. Engelschall http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-22309 Ralf S. Engelschall Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:18:24 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-22309 Suso: you're right, I fully agree: the lack of up-to-date documentation is RPM's greatest problem. And with all the new RPM 5 features it became even more worst than it ever was before. But when I would write another book (the first one I wrote was about Apache) I certainly would write a book about the combination of RPM 5 (the packaging tool) and OpenPKG (the packaging facility around the tool). A plain RPM 5 book someone else would have to write... ;-) Suso: you’re right, I fully agree: the lack of up-to-date documentation is RPM’s greatest problem. And with all the new RPM 5 features it became even more worst than it ever was before. But when I would write another book (the first one I wrote was about Apache) I certainly would write a book about the combination of RPM 5 (the packaging tool) and OpenPKG (the packaging facility around the tool). A plain RPM 5 book someone else would have to write… ;-)

]]> By: Suso Banderas http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2008/04/14/rpm-51-released/#comment-22300 Suso Banderas Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:24:52 +0000 http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/?p=73#comment-22300 Great, now write a book about it. This isn't directed specifically at you Ralf (although I'd love it if you did write a book about it), but there is a real lack of information about RPM. Everytime I ask, I'm refered (HTTP spelling) to Maximum RPM (which I've read through), but that book was written back in the 90s for RPM 2. Its seriously out of date. There are many new fields, directives and features of RPM that I see used in specfiles, but I can't find any good information on what they mean. Someone please! I've thought about doing it myself, but I think someone who is closer to the development team should be responsible for it. Great, now write a book about it. This isn’t directed specifically at you Ralf (although I’d love it if you did write a book about it), but there is a real lack of information about RPM. Everytime I ask, I’m refered (HTTP spelling) to Maximum RPM (which I’ve read through), but that book was written back in the 90s for RPM 2. Its seriously out of date. There are many new fields, directives and features of RPM that I see used in specfiles, but I can’t find any good information on what they mean.

Someone please! I’ve thought about doing it myself, but I think someone who is closer to the development team should be responsible for it.

]]>