Re: More an autopackage

[Harlan Stenn]

> > Are there several issues here?
> >
> > The package maintainer has the package to worry about.
>
> Aha!  Here's the crossed wire.  What I was envisioning was a package tool
> designed such that most platforms wouldn't _need_ devoted package
> maintainers .

We're using different language.  For example, Dave Mills and I maintain the
NTP package.  I do all of the auto* work, he does the guts.  We'd be
thrilled to have something that would produce suitable Stuff so folks who
want to build RPMs could do so, and ditto for various other packaging
formats.

However, Dave and I are not going to have access to all of these systems, so 
we'd be happy to let Somebody Else ship us patches to for the ABC packaging
system used by the XYZ OS.

And when I, as the admin of an HP-UX box wants to do a "depot" install using 
my localized paradigm for package installs, it would be Swell if autopackage 
accomodated this and wiggled various "configure" options accordingly.

For example, I'd often like to default "prefix" to
/usr/local/pkg/@PACKAGE@/@address@hidden@MyLocalConfigRevisionLevel@ (where that
last bit starts with the letter "a" and goes up every time I install a
different copy, where I decide what "different" means).  When I build the
package, I would also want DESTDIR set so I could easily package the bundle
for other hairy things.

H