RPM vs MAKE (keeping system clean)

woosting · #1 18th February 2005, 05:59 PM

Hello,

I installed a program using ./configure > make install

No problem with that, but how do I, as the administrator, keep track of everything that is installed to keep the system clean from unused programs etc.?

This question regards both RPM as MAKE usage...
Thank you in advance!

Newbie, but learning

ilja · #2 18th February 2005, 06:03 PM

RPM was meant to solve your problem. If you install all the packages without it, then it is your own problem.

The middleway is to create rpm files from source (quite complicated) and to install them.

veritas · #3 18th February 2005, 10:00 PM

ilja was having a bad day. He is aware that some programs do not come with rpm's. I would like an answer to this question as well. Just some general housekeeping tips on what to do with those src packages we must occasionally use. I don't like it, but sometimes either there isn't an rpm or else you need to configure with certain options to get past some difficulty or another. Maybe he'll be feeling better tomorrow ;-)

Bob D. · #4 18th February 2005, 11:44 PM

One way I've heard of (thanks to FedoraForum!

) is to install CheckInstall . If I understand what it does correctly, when you run "make install", CheckInstall goes into action and makes a RPM for you rather than installing the program. You can then install the RPM locally and manage it with Synaptic, YUM, etc.

I've downloaded the CheckInstall RPM but haven't installed it myself yet. Search these forums for some posts on CheckInstall.

HTH,

Bob

pileofrogs · #5 19th February 2005, 01:46 AM

If you install something from source and you want to know what it installs where, run "make -n install | less" This prints the commands issued by "make install", which should tell you what you want to know.

Also, try running "./configure --help" before running ./configure && make && make install. Check out the options for specifying where you want things to go. That can go a long way to keeping the non RPM programs organized.

-Dylan

woosting · #6 19th February 2005, 10:19 PM

First of all thank you for this overwhelming size of reactions, it is really cool to see how well newbs get treated over here! I learnt a lot from all your answers!

QUOTE: " ilja was having a bad day. He is aware that some programs do not come with rpm's. .... Maybe he'll be feeling better tomorrow ;-)"

Exactly my problem! And yeah let's hope so!

QUOTE: "One way I've heard of (thanks to FedoraForum! ) is to install CheckInstall"

Ill try that one!

QUOTE " run "make -n install | less" This prints the commands issued by "make install" "

Yup that is what I am doing so far (when I cant find an RPM) and try to keep up with everything I install.

Thank you all!!

Scribbler1 · #7 20th February 2005, 12:09 AM

Here's something you might find useful if you find making .RPMs a bit clunky...

http://paco.sourceforge.net/

Basically it keeps a log/database of all your source installs.

Woad_Warrior · #8 20th February 2005, 06:50 AM

Bob D. actually if you're using checkinstall you don't run "make install". you do ./configure, make, then checkinstall. checkinstall runs "make install" during the process of building the rpm. it does not however actually install your program by default. you have to edit the checkinstall config file to get it to do the install. you can also edit the config file to automatically select whether you want to make a deb, rpm, or slack package, what architecture you want the package for, and a couple other default options.
checkinstall is however a great utility to keep the amount of source installs to a minimum. (it unfortunately doesn't work with all sourcecode)

Void Main · #9 20th February 2005, 03:46 PM

This still doesn't register the software that you install in the RPM database. When software is registered in the RPM databse it can be used for dependency resolutions when you install other packages. Otherwise other RPM packages won't know that the package is installed. Another benefit of being in the RPM database is being able to verify the software is installed as it should be, that all the permissions are right, that things haven't changed, and permissions can be set back to installation defaults if needed. For me, I try and install *everything* as an RPM if possible. If there isn't an RPM for something I want to install I create an RPM for it. If you would like an RPM of an open source package and there isn't currently one for your version of RPM based distribution and you are not capable of creating one just post a message that you would like to see an RPM for the package and I'm sure someone here will pick the task up and create one for you. I have done this quite a few times for people on my site. Once a spec file is created to build a package it is trivial to modify it for upgrades or other RPM based distros.

Void Main · #10 20th February 2005, 03:49 PM

Another option would be to post a message here and one of us would likely be happy to create an RPM for you.

Bob D. · #11 20th February 2005, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woad_Warrior

Bob D. actually if you're using checkinstall you don't run "make install". you do ./configure, make, then checkinstall. checkinstall runs "make install" during the process of building the rpm. it does not however actually install your program by default. you have to edit the checkinstall config file to get it to do the install. you can also edit the config file to automatically select whether you want to make a deb, rpm, or slack package, what architecture you want the package for, and a couple other default options.
checkinstall is however a great utility to keep the amount of source installs to a minimum. (it unfortunately doesn't work with all sourcecode)

Excellent info Woad Warrior! This is the info I was curious about before I installed CheckInstall. Great post, very helpful!

@Void Man:
That's a very kind offer! I've been reading up on HOWTO create RPM's. Did a Google search, seems the most difficult part is writing the spec file. Other than trying to read other spec files and learn from them, can you recommend a site to lget a better understanding of writing the spec file? I'd like to learn how to make an RPM...if that fails, I might just come knocking to accept your offer.

Sorry for kinda hijacking your thread woosting.

Bob

woosting · #12 20th February 2005, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob D.

@Void Man:
That's a very kind offer! I've been reading up on HOWTO create RPM's. Did a Google search, seems the most difficult part is writing the spec file. Other than trying to read other spec files and learn from them, can you recommend a site to lget a better understanding of writing the spec file? I'd like to learn how to make an RPM...if that fails, I might just come knocking to accept your offer.

Sorry for kinda hijacking your thread woosting.

Bob

@Bob:
No problem, maybe you can post what you know about making RPM's to make up for it

? Or at least point me towards the correct webpages because I would like to make them myself asswell.

@Void man:
I have 2 sources I would like to turn unto RPM's (both mud clients) I will try the checkinstall but what if I fail? Where should I place them, for people to make it into a RPM (as long as I cant make them myself)? Or should I just post the links where the sources can be downloaded?

Tinyfugue: http://ftp.tcp.com/pub/mud/Clients/tinyfugue/
dMUD: http://www.fatemud.com:8080/fate/dmud.tgz

Void Main · #13 20th February 2005, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woosting

@Void man:
I have 2 sources I would like to turn unto RPM's (both mud clients) I will try the checkinstall but what if I fail? Where should I place them, for people to make it into a RPM (as long as I cant make them myself)? Or should I just post the links where the sources can be downloaded?

Tinyfugue: http://ftp.tcp.com/pub/mud/Clients/tinyfugue/
dMUD: http://www.fatemud.com:8080/fate/dmud.tgz

Ok, I've built the first one for you. If you want you can try to build the second one. I will do it if you want. As far as building RPMs you might want to look at this thread on my site:
http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/forums...opic.php?t=991

I put the "TinyFugue" RPMs in my apt repository so you can just "apt-get install tf" if you want:

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/files/RPMS/

The HTML indexes:
http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/files/....i386.rpm.html
http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/files/...m.src.rpm.html

The RPMS:
http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/files/...c3.vm.i386.rpm
http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/files/...fc3.vm.src.rpm

woosting · #14 21st February 2005, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Void Main

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/forums...opic.php?t=991

I took a quick glance, it looks fairly difficult, but do-able if I put in some time/effort (and get some help from experianced "coders" like you. However it will take me some time to figure it out (time is scarce since I am doing my Masters-thesis at the moment). Can I add you as a buddy and ask you some questions when I will REALLY try to build my RPM's?

BandC · #15 21st February 2005, 05:08 PM

I keep two text files in my home folder. One has the names of software I installed from source. The other one has the names of the software I manually installed with rpm. I update these two files whenever I install something without yum or apt. Does it help much? Probably not. But at least it kinda reminds me what I installed on my computer.