Slackware Powertools

Mr Paul

On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:

> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
> apps/libs from source.
>
> du -h
>
> 5.5G

Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
internationalization and my system shows:

du -h

3.9G

and I've installed lots of other apps as well.

Paul

Mr Paul

On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:

> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
> apps/libs from source.
>
> du -h
>
> 5.5G

Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
internationalization and my system shows:

du -h

3.9G

and I've installed lots of other apps as well.

Paul

Tom N

On 2007-12-25, Mr Paul <mr.p@nothing.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:
>
>> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
>> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
>> apps/libs from source.
>>
>> du -h
>>
>> 5.5G
>
> Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
> internationalization and my system shows:
>
> du -h
>
> 3.9G
>
> and I've installed lots of other apps as well.
>
> Paul

Yeh. I have a lot of uncompressed music files, the kernel sources, sources for
a lot of apps/libs I have already built and installed that need to be cleaned out, and had a
cd mounted, a lot of enormous PDF docs on non-digital subjects...

But 3.9G is still enormous compared to a few years ago. I could probably get down
to 2.5G with a thorough housecleaning, and even that is enormous.

The point of reference here is a Slackware that could be installed using a pile of
floppies and a dialup connection...

Tom

--
simpleman.s43
That would be at gee male

Tom N

On 2007-12-25, Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> wrote:
> Tom N <tom@somewhere.invalid> wrote:
>> To hells with "fakeroot" and slackbuild scripts and all that crap.
>> I could build a thousand good packages in the time it would take
>> to learn all that.
>
> Let me suggest yet another "crap", makepack. When I wrote makepack one of
> the main intentions was that the rule files would be as short and easy to
> write as possible. The result is that it might even be quicker to write a
> rule file and type "make foo install" than doing download, unpacking,
> typing "./configure", typing "make", typing "sudo make install".
>
> A rule file in its most simple form might look something like this:
>
> -8<------------------------------
> DESCRIPTION = The famous foo program
> SRC_PKG = foo-1.0.tar.bz2
> URL_DIR = ftp://ftp.foo.org/pub/releases/
> -8<------------------------------
>
> So, which advantages does this rule file have compared to manually
> downloading, "./configure", "make" and "sudo make install"?
>
> 1) You get the software installed as a Slackware package which can be
> removed with removepkg.
>
> 2) In the future, when you want to upgrade the application foo or when you
> want to upgrade your Slackware version the rule file works as
> documentation. You know exectly how you installed that software and can
> easily repeat the installation. If you want to upgrade to a newer
> version next time you install the software you only need to change a
> single line in the rule file.
>
> 3) If you install software with complex dependencies like transcode or
> mplayer, makepack also has mechanisms for keeping track of dependencies.
>
> regards Henrik

Assuming that you are talking about a bash/sh script or a C/C++ program, it
sounds quite useful. I don't seem to have it here, according to apropos. Did
I miss a link on this thread?

Yes, I did: http://makepack.sourceforge.net

Will check it out.

Cheers,

Tom

--
simpleman.s43
That would be at gee male

Mr Paul

On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:

> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
> apps/libs from source.
>
> du -h
>
> 5.5G

Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
internationalization and my system shows:

du -h

3.9G

and I've installed lots of other apps as well.

Paul

Henrik Carlqvist

Tom N <tom@somewhere.invalid> wrote:
> To hells with "fakeroot" and slackbuild scripts and all that crap.
> I could build a thousand good packages in the time it would take
> to learn all that.

Let me suggest yet another "crap", makepack. When I wrote makepack one of
the main intentions was that the rule files would be as short and easy to
write as possible. The result is that it might even be quicker to write a
rule file and type "make foo install" than doing download, unpacking,
typing "./configure", typing "make", typing "sudo make install".

A rule file in its most simple form might look something like this:

-8<------------------------------
DESCRIPTION = The famous foo program
SRC_PKG = foo-1.0.tar.bz2
URL_DIR = ftp://ftp.foo.org/pub/releases/
-8<------------------------------

So, which advantages does this rule file have compared to manually
downloading, "./configure", "make" and "sudo make install"?

1) You get the software installed as a Slackware package which can be
removed with removepkg.

2) In the future, when you want to upgrade the application foo or when you
want to upgrade your Slackware version the rule file works as
documentation. You know exectly how you installed that software and can
easily repeat the installation. If you want to upgrade to a newer
version next time you install the software you only need to change a
single line in the rule file.

3) If you install software with complex dependencies like transcode or
mplayer, makepack also has mechanisms for keeping track of dependencies.

regards Henrik
--
The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
hc1(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
root@localhost postmaster@localhost

Henrik Carlqvist

Tom N <tom@somewhere.invalid> wrote:
> To hells with "fakeroot" and slackbuild scripts and all that crap.
> I could build a thousand good packages in the time it would take
> to learn all that.

Let me suggest yet another "crap", makepack. When I wrote makepack one of
the main intentions was that the rule files would be as short and easy to
write as possible. The result is that it might even be quicker to write a
rule file and type "make foo install" than doing download, unpacking,
typing "./configure", typing "make", typing "sudo make install".

A rule file in its most simple form might look something like this:

-8<------------------------------
DESCRIPTION = The famous foo program
SRC_PKG = foo-1.0.tar.bz2
URL_DIR = ftp://ftp.foo.org/pub/releases/
-8<------------------------------

So, which advantages does this rule file have compared to manually
downloading, "./configure", "make" and "sudo make install"?

1) You get the software installed as a Slackware package which can be
removed with removepkg.

2) In the future, when you want to upgrade the application foo or when you
want to upgrade your Slackware version the rule file works as
documentation. You know exectly how you installed that software and can
easily repeat the installation. If you want to upgrade to a newer
version next time you install the software you only need to change a
single line in the rule file.

3) If you install software with complex dependencies like transcode or
mplayer, makepack also has mechanisms for keeping track of dependencies.

regards Henrik
--
The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
hc1(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
root@localhost postmaster@localhost

Henrik Carlqvist

Tom N <tom@somewhere.invalid> wrote:
> To hells with "fakeroot" and slackbuild scripts and all that crap.
> I could build a thousand good packages in the time it would take
> to learn all that.

Let me suggest yet another "crap", makepack. When I wrote makepack one of
the main intentions was that the rule files would be as short and easy to
write as possible. The result is that it might even be quicker to write a
rule file and type "make foo install" than doing download, unpacking,
typing "./configure", typing "make", typing "sudo make install".

A rule file in its most simple form might look something like this:

-8<------------------------------
DESCRIPTION = The famous foo program
SRC_PKG = foo-1.0.tar.bz2
URL_DIR = ftp://ftp.foo.org/pub/releases/
-8<------------------------------

So, which advantages does this rule file have compared to manually
downloading, "./configure", "make" and "sudo make install"?

1) You get the software installed as a Slackware package which can be
removed with removepkg.

2) In the future, when you want to upgrade the application foo or when you
want to upgrade your Slackware version the rule file works as
documentation. You know exectly how you installed that software and can
easily repeat the installation. If you want to upgrade to a newer
version next time you install the software you only need to change a
single line in the rule file.

3) If you install software with complex dependencies like transcode or
mplayer, makepack also has mechanisms for keeping track of dependencies.

regards Henrik
--
The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
hc1(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
root@localhost postmaster@localhost

Tom N

On 2007-12-25, Mr Paul <mr.p@nothing.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:
>
>> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
>> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
>> apps/libs from source.
>>
>> du -h
>>
>> 5.5G
>
> Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
> internationalization and my system shows:
>
> du -h
>
> 3.9G
>
> and I've installed lots of other apps as well.
>
> Paul

Yeh. I have a lot of uncompressed music files, the kernel sources, sources for
a lot of apps/libs I have already built and installed that need to be cleaned out, and had a
cd mounted, a lot of enormous PDF docs on non-digital subjects...

But 3.9G is still enormous compared to a few years ago. I could probably get down
to 2.5G with a thorough housecleaning, and even that is enormous.

The point of reference here is a Slackware that could be installed using a pile of
floppies and a dialup connection...

Tom

--
simpleman.s43
That would be at gee male

Tom N

On 2007-12-25, Mr Paul <mr.p@nothing.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:55:08 +0100, Tom N wrote:
>
>> I am using the most basic install possible here, with just basic X and a
>> window manager. And the basic development tools needed to build
>> apps/libs from source.
>>
>> du -h
>>
>> 5.5G
>
> Odd, I do a full install (including TeX) except for kde
> internationalization and my system shows:
>
> du -h
>
> 3.9G
>
> and I've installed lots of other apps as well.
>
> Paul

Yeh. I have a lot of uncompressed music files, the kernel sources, sources for
a lot of apps/libs I have already built and installed that need to be cleaned out, and had a
cd mounted, a lot of enormous PDF docs on non-digital subjects...

But 3.9G is still enormous compared to a few years ago. I could probably get down
to 2.5G with a thorough housecleaning, and even that is enormous.

The point of reference here is a Slackware that could be installed using a pile of
floppies and a dialup connection...

Tom

--
simpleman.s43
That would be at gee male