LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 03-12-2018, 06:54 AM   #31
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,214

Rep: Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987Reputation: 2987

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxbawks View Post
You're pointing the same thing and over and over again showing little credit to the problems in the PMS. What you're pointing out are really questions of policy.
You asked for an in-depth answer, which I provided. But due to your ignorance of slackpkg, you say we're all wrong. Maybe it's time to learn how it is supposed to actually work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxbawks View Post
[B]So you want to draw a distinction between a SW package and a tar archive. Fine. Then don't call it a tar archive in the first place.
Why should we not call a Slackware package a tar archive? That's exactly what it is. A Slackware package is just a tar archive with a little extra metadata in it. Nothing more. You don't need specialty tools to extract it... you can simply use tar x to extract it, which does make it a tar archive. Slackware doesn't want to create a new format, they just add some metadata to the archive in the form of a folder and file(s) and make it become a package.

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxbawks View Post
slackpkg syncs with the repo. Fine. But it is clearly having unintended consequences.
What you are totally misunderstanding is the results you are seeing are not unintended. That is the way slackpkg is designed to work. If you don't want it to present packages for you to update, add them to /etc/slackpkg/blacklist. That is how slackpkg is intended to be used. Just because you want it another way doesn't mean that it is doing exactly what it was designed to do.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 06:57 AM   #32
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by montagdude View Post
I feel like I've read this story before. Someone makes a thread giving well-meaning but misguided suggestions, then gets upset and starts throwing insults at Slackware when people tell him the suggestions are no good.

Anyway, I don't get why the PMS should happily try to install any archive you throw at it. That's a good way for people to screw up their systems. I suggest you look at the makepkg command if you want to turn a properly assembled directory into a Slackware package. That is its whole purpose.
Careful now, look closely at who all started throwing the very first insults. Fair enough, perhaps that's the ethos dished about here.

installpkg already has a rudimentary check to see if the contents of a package matches a valid deployment. Even if you throw any archive into the system it won't just fuck everything up unless you force it to by ay number of other means. Anyway if you read what I wrote at the outset, make kernel produces a .tar.xz but installpkg wants a .txz file. It's otherwise perfectly fine to install a kernel package generated .tar build using installpkg after renaming the file. It obviously won't have the SW branding in the file but who cares.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:02 AM   #33
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal View Post
You asked for an in-depth answer, which I provided. But due to your ignorance of slackpkg, you say we're all wrong. Maybe it's time to learn how it is supposed to actually work.



Why should we not call a Slackware package a tar archive? That's exactly what it is. A Slackware package is just a tar archive with a little extra metadata in it. Nothing more. You don't need specialty tools to extract it... you can simply use tar x to extract it, which does make it a tar archive. Slackware doesn't want to create a new format, they just add some metadata to the archive in the form of a folder and file(s) and make it become a package.



What you are totally misunderstanding is the results you are seeing are not unintended. That is the way slackpkg is designed to work. If you don't want it to present packages for you to update, add them to /etc/slackpkg/blacklist. That is how slackpkg is intended to be used. Just because you want it another way doesn't mean that it is doing exactly what it was designed to do.
Wrong! Don't call a sync an upgrade then.

The argument slackpkg upgrade-all should then be slackpkg sync. This leaves slackpkg upgrade void.

You contradict AB.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:02 AM   #34
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,184

Rep: Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxbawks View Post
It obviously won't have the SW branding in the file but who cares.
This is why you can also install a kernel from source without using the Slackware package management tools. Because all the rest of us do care about package quality. And Slackware is completely cool with anyone who wants to bypass the pkgtools and install binaries manually. I always found that a strength.
But do not try to impose on the rest of us, your skewed view of what the Slackware pkgtools should or should not do. You are 24 years too late for that.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:05 AM   #35
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Have you given one thought as to why the kernel ships with a make tarxz-pkg feature?
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:07 AM   #36
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Code:
Kernel packaging:
  rpm-pkg             - Build both source and binary RPM kernel packages
  binrpm-pkg          - Build only the binary kernel RPM package
  deb-pkg             - Build both source and binary deb kernel packages
  bindeb-pkg          - Build only the binary kernel deb package
  tar-pkg             - Build the kernel as an uncompressed tarball
  targz-pkg           - Build the kernel as a gzip compressed tarball
  tarbz2-pkg          - Build the kernel as a bzip2 compressed tarball
  tarxz-pkg           - Build the kernel as a xz compressed tarball
  perf-tar-src-pkg    - Build perf-4.14.26.tar source tarball
  perf-targz-src-pkg  - Build perf-4.14.26.tar.gz source tarball
  perf-tarbz2-src-pkg - Build perf-4.14.26.tar.bz2 source tarball
  perf-tarxz-src-pkg  - Build perf-4.14.26.tar.xz source tarball
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:12 AM   #37
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
I've decied to upgrade my distro from -14.2 to -current. Then I will upgrade again to -14.1.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:12 AM   #38
allend
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 4,987

Rep: Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730
Quote:
Tiny amendments which would make more sense and make a huge improvement to the PMS.
I would spin that back to the OP as "Tiny amendments to your knowledge would make more sense and make a huge improvement to your experience."
Quote:
Distribution: Quackware
Cute.

Quote:
A Slackware package is really not much more different than the archive produced.
Quote:
So you want to draw a distinction between a SW package and a tar archive. Fine. Then don't call it a tar archive in the first place.
First, you need to get head around the idea that a .tar.gz file archive is not the same as a .t[gx]z Slackware package. e.g. The latter often includes a doinst.sh script for additional processing.

You are not forced to use 'slackpkg'. You may appreciate the utility more if you try to maintain a Slackware install without it, as Slackware veterans had to do before slackpkg came along.

Quote:
The present policy of listing packages from the repo as upgrades to already newer installed packages is baffling.
The reasoning behind not implementing such behaviour is to allow for reversion of packages when an upgrade is found to cause problems. This _has_ happened.

Quote:
One could blacklist custom packages but then there's no way of knowing when a package might be available for an upgrade.
Yes, this is a trap when using slackpkg. I have been there and done that.

Quote:
The word up in upgrade means to wind something up. Not in this case.
There have been suggestions that 'upgradepkg' might be better named as 'replacepkg', as the latter name better reflects the actual functionality. But a rose by any other name is still a rose.

The sad fact of the matter is that you expect slackpkg to read your mind. When _you_ have upgraded to a later version that _you_ want to keep, then slackpkg should leave it alone. When the distro has changed the version, then slackpkg should deal with it.
Sorry, software cannot read minds, but minds can instruct software.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:14 AM   #39
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
"..version numbers are meaingless here. You can go forwards or go back and see Slackware born again..."
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:24 AM   #40
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
@allend you're just reiterating like a parrot the same issues that the others have pointed out.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:28 AM   #41
55020
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Yorks. W.R. 167397
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,244
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Have you given one thought why those kernel package targets list 'targz' but not 'tgz'?

There exists no authority that says .tgz is the same as .tar.gz. That's just the voice in your head -- the same voice that invented your 'PMS' terminology.

Out here in Slackware land, by convention, a Slackware package must
  • Be compatible with tar-1.13; the pathnames must not begin with './'
  • Have a name of the form packagename-version-arch-build
  • Contain a top-level directory 'install' with a file named 'slack-desc' in a specific format

And furthermore, it's not our bloody fault what the Linux kernel make targets might call themselves, but it is crystal bloody clear that they are NOT Slackware packages, and crystal bloody clear that they do NOT call them .tgz or .txz or .tbz or .tlz.

Code:
  targz-pkg           - Build the kernel as a gzip compressed tarball
  tarbz2-pkg          - Build the kernel as a bzip2 compressed tarball
  tarxz-pkg           - Build the kernel as a xz compressed tarball
All Slackware packages are compressed tar archives. Not all compressed tar archives are Slackware packages. Is that too difficult a concept for you to grasp? cos everybody else here gets it.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-12-2018, 07:30 AM   #42
allend
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 4,987

Rep: Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730Reputation: 1730
At least I am squawking and not quacking.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-12-2018, 07:36 AM   #43
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Duh, .t* is just a shorthand for .tar.*. It's a throwback to legacy FS compatibility.

The fact it's printed .tarxz-pkg could just as well be .txz-pkg.

Yes, yes, yes thank you I think we all know what's in a branded SW package and what isn't.
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:39 AM   #44
linuxbawks
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Distribution: Snuckware
Posts: 240

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by 55020 View Post
And furthermore, it's not our bloody fault what the Linux kernel make targets might call themselves, but it is crystal bloody clear that they are NOT Slackware packages, and crystal bloody clear that they do NOT call them .tgz or .txz or .tbz or .tlz.
Are you trying to say that SW has hijacked .t* in lieu of .tar.* when they are in fact the same thing?
 
Old 03-12-2018, 07:45 AM   #45
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,184

Rep: Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168Reputation: 5168
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxbawks View Post
Are you trying to say that SW has hijacked .t* in lieu of .tar.* when they are in fact the same thing?
I think we should all stop answering here. Clear example of trolling which should not be rewarded by allowing the troll forum points for writing ridiculous replies.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SOLVED] [ENCHANCEMENT] slackpkg+: do not show the notices "pkglist is older than 24h..." and "remember to re-run 'slackpkg update''..."... yars Slackware 1 01-09-2016 09:56 AM
having trouble after upgrading 14.1 slackware using slackpkg and slackpkg+ [solved] slackartist Slackware 1 12-28-2015 07:28 AM
[SOLVED] Slackpkg, Slackpkg Plus, Slackware 14.1 x86_64 install.log delay or slow to write bamunds Slackware 7 04-22-2014 11:12 AM
[SOLVED] typos in latest /etc/slackpkg/mirrors(.new) [slackpkg-2.82.0-noarch-8.tgz] wailingwailer Slackware 4 09-22-2012 04:04 AM
Slackpkg: missing something in /usr/libexec/slackpkg/functions.d/dialog-functions.sh michelino Slackware 4 03-20-2007 12:22 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration