src.rpm and i386.rpm ?

futurist · 07-14-2003, 01:40 AM

which one can be installed in redhat?
what's the different ?

aizkorri · 07-14-2003, 01:50 AM

Install the i386.rpm.
The src one is the source rpm. You only need it if you want to check the source code.

JZL240I-U · 07-14-2003, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by aizkorri
... The src one is the source rpm. You only need it if you want to check the source code.

Does that mean, that it is incomplete for compilation? I mean, no makes, no headers etc., just plain c / c++?

whansard · 07-14-2003, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JZL240I-U
Does that mean, that it is incomplete for compilation? I mean, no makes, no headers etc., just plain c / c++?

no, that just means it's a source code rpm. it's just
a tarball in a slightly enhanced package

JZL240I-U · 07-14-2003, 02:03 AM

Why an rpm then? tarball would be enough, since one uses the locally installed libs and compiler anyhow (no dependencies etc). I mean, what is the advantage of the rpm format here?

whansard · 07-14-2003, 02:08 AM

it's for redhat. if you extract an rpm, you'll see the other
stuff there. if you compile the src.rpm with an rpm
command, then install the resulting rpm, then your rpm
database knows it's installed. and it's easy to uninstall
or upgrade later.

JZL240I-U · 07-14-2003, 03:14 AM

Mhm. So all it does, is making an rpm -i <new program> unnecessary

. Glorious.

kublador · 07-14-2003, 03:16 AM

i got a source rpm file.. what should i do first to install the whole rpm and make the rpm up and running? thanks

aizkorri · 07-14-2003, 03:48 AM

check this thread:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...threadid=71504

whansard · 07-14-2003, 05:31 AM

i don't ever use source rpm's unless i can't find the
source any other way, but it has it's advantages.
with one command it will extract the source, configure and
compile it, create a binary rpm, delete the extracted
source, and install the binary rpm, updating the rpm
database, to keep track of the install.