#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by afb@…): The rpm45, apt-rpm, poldek, and yum-arch ports are abandoned/obsoleted and can be deleted... The others are just outdated, but there is no major reason to keep all 7 versions of rpm around: * rpm * rpm45 * rpm50 * rpm51 * rpm52 * rpm53 * rpm54 Especially not when there is no interest in doing packaging for MacPorts, like with OpenDarwin ? I don't think anyone is actively using the "port rpm" command, all preferring the .tbz2 archives -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:1> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by egall@…): Replying to [comment:1 afb@…]:

The rpm45, apt-rpm, poldek, and yum-arch ports are abandoned/obsoleted and can be deleted... yum-arch at least still works though...

Especially not when there is no interest in doing packaging for MacPorts, like with OpenDarwin ? Um, I'm personally interested in someday moving to OpenDarwin/PureDarwin...

-- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:3> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by egall@…): Replying to [comment:2 larryv@…]:

...

Especially not when there is no interest in doing packaging for MacPorts, like with OpenDarwin?

I’d say this is an accurate assessment. MacPorts does have a lot of “features” that are probably used by single-digit numbers of people. That's what makes it my favorite package manager on OS X though! I prefer having all the power available to me even if I'm not necessarily going to use it all the time.

...

I don't think anyone is actively using the "port rpm" command, all preferring the .tbz2 archives

There’s a `port rpm` command?

There's also a `port dpkg` command, as there's some interest in packaging for various Linux distros, such as Ubuntu: for example, see: - this thread on the mailing lists: https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail /macports-users/2013-February/031955.html - this ticket: #32530 and the page it links to: https://code.launchpad.net/~rudloff/+archive/macports -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:5> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by afb@…): Replying to [comment:5 egall@…]:

There's also a `port dpkg` command, as there's some interest in packaging for various Linux distros, such as Ubuntu: for example, see:

- this thread on the mailing lists: https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports- users/2013-February/031955.html - this ticket: #32530 and the page it links to: https://code.launchpad.net/~rudloff/+archive/macports

The "port dpkg" command is probably best off deleted, can't think of a purpose for it (and the format is even worse than the xar). Other thread is interesting, but was more about the .deb packaging of MacPorts itself (similar to the .pkg installer for Mac OS X) Sentence should be removed from the home page, but it was still worthwhile at the time to port "base" over to FreeBSD and Linux. At least as long as it doesn't use more of Cocoa than it does, when the Objective-C rewrite is done then that won't work anymore. As for using the actual ports, those are probably useless. There's a fair amount of them that won't even work on Darwin... ;-) -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:7> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by egall@…): Replying to [comment:7 afb@…]:

Replying to [comment:5 egall@…]:

...

There's also a `port dpkg` command, as there's some interest in packaging for various Linux distros, such as Ubuntu: for example, see:

- this thread on the mailing lists: https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports- users/2013-February/031955.html - this ticket: #32530 and the page it links to: https://code.launchpad.net/~rudloff/+archive/macports

The "port dpkg" command is probably best off deleted, can't think of a purpose for it (and the format is even worse than the xar).

`dpkg` is a good enough format for Fink and Cydia at least

At least as long as it doesn't use more of Cocoa than it does, when the Objective-C rewrite is done then that won't work anymore.

iirc the Objective-C parts of MacPorts work on other platforms that use Gnustep, which is why there are configure checks for Gnustep and stuff in base. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:9> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Changes (by afb@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => wontfix Comment: It is not as off-topic as it might seem... There was a real use case of using the open rpm format instead of the proprietary pkg format, so that one could make packages even on a "Open" or "Pure" version of Darwin. Thus exists the "rpm" port, which was intended to provide both rpmbuild for the "port rpm" command and the rpm means to install it afterwards. And some tools like apt-rpm or smart, to help manage those. Then there is the other use case, which is looking at RPMS for Linux but still on your Mac. There tools like yum and createrepo are useful, to avoid having to use a virtual machine for those tasks. But you are probably right about the number of ports, and those were the binary figures I mentioned: "I use it myself" (1) or "someone might use it" (0). But that's a different issue than the just the age or the most used platform of a software. And rpm isn't exactly the only port that MacPorts keeps myriads of variants of, just because it can't be decided which version to be providing. It would be nice if there was a real fix for versions of dependencies, so that port could handle things like python or db or rpm without ports. Maybe groups and subports can be leveraged as a better alternative than variants and select ? Anyway, it seems useless to rename "rpm" to "rpm44" just because the others have numbers in them. And it's all "rpm", so there is no way to install more than one and thus no need for a "select" either ? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:12> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by afb@…): See #36318. One solution is to keep just one of each, rather than having rpm48/rpm49/rpm410/rpm411 and rpm45/rpm52/rpm53/rpm54 ? But it's "easier" to just keep rpm 4.4.x around forever, than actually making some decisions on what software to keep in the tree. [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Consistency Consistency] -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:14> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by afb@…): Also, r12697 and r12699. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:16> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#38456: Port request: rpm_select (and other rpm port improvements) ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: egall@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: reopened Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.1.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: rpm rpm45 rpm52 rpm53 rpm54 | ------------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Changes (by afb@…): * status: closed => reopened * resolution: wontfix => -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/38456#comment:18> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X