16
Applications / Re: Creating some apps RPM packages
« on: June 22, 2021, 01:31:28 am »
Dave: Thanks for the info on updating AOS. I will give the latest version a shot. (Now if it were only that easy to update from eCS to AOS - oh well..)
Ivan: I too love WarpIn - great product, although it needs a better database for storing installed app information; the 2 levels that INI files provides is not enough. But I can understand and agree with RPM for the unixy stuff. That stuff is SO intertwined and complicated. And I am actually OK with UNIXROOT being a drive letter instead of a path for the messy, snakey, interdependent unixy stuff. That stuff is so complicated that I am kinda scared to even look down in the depths of UNIXROOT.
What Martin was talking about was RPM-izing legacy type OS/2 apps. That has lots of benefits, and some downsides. It is legacy apps (and SOME unix type apps like Firefox) that I want the ability to chose where stuff goes. Here's why: I run a number of Win-OS/2 apps. That means I really need to keep my boot drive partitioned at 2 GB or less and I need to be careful about what I install on the boot drive so I don't run out of space. I also am running SSD and rotating disks and I try and put the stuff that changes a lot (Swapper, firefox cache, etc.) on the rotating disk and keep the test on the SSD partitions.
So I think we absolutely need the ability, at least with legacy apps, to chose where they go. And it would be nice to have the ability to choose even with some unix apps.
The downside of RPM verses WarpIn is it looks like RPM is much more complicated to setup. I mean complicated for the app maker to setup an install to work with RPM. But it is nice to be able to select a list of apps (like with APM) and install them all at once.. And for them to be available from one (virtual) locate.
Ivan: I too love WarpIn - great product, although it needs a better database for storing installed app information; the 2 levels that INI files provides is not enough. But I can understand and agree with RPM for the unixy stuff. That stuff is SO intertwined and complicated. And I am actually OK with UNIXROOT being a drive letter instead of a path for the messy, snakey, interdependent unixy stuff. That stuff is so complicated that I am kinda scared to even look down in the depths of UNIXROOT.
What Martin was talking about was RPM-izing legacy type OS/2 apps. That has lots of benefits, and some downsides. It is legacy apps (and SOME unix type apps like Firefox) that I want the ability to chose where stuff goes. Here's why: I run a number of Win-OS/2 apps. That means I really need to keep my boot drive partitioned at 2 GB or less and I need to be careful about what I install on the boot drive so I don't run out of space. I also am running SSD and rotating disks and I try and put the stuff that changes a lot (Swapper, firefox cache, etc.) on the rotating disk and keep the test on the SSD partitions.
So I think we absolutely need the ability, at least with legacy apps, to chose where they go. And it would be nice to have the ability to choose even with some unix apps.
The downside of RPM verses WarpIn is it looks like RPM is much more complicated to setup. I mean complicated for the app maker to setup an install to work with RPM. But it is nice to be able to select a list of apps (like with APM) and install them all at once.. And for them to be available from one (virtual) locate.