View Full Version : work through rpm-build

06-08-2007, 03:00 PM
Why not making it work through rpm-build in the next version?

Build everything into rpm packages and then install/update the packages?

Probably less downtime?

(Probably some time too to make it work this way, but i'd be happy to help in my spare time. Unless someone tells me it can't be done ofcource ;P)

06-09-2007, 01:30 AM
There aren't any downtimes at compile time. rpm-build is compatible only with RedHat based systems, what about FreeBSD and Debian?

06-09-2007, 06:47 AM
There aren't?

Ok, i thought so. Since i've been told sometimes packages need each other, and when updating one of them you sometimes need to compile the other one as well. General logic then is that you have downtime while compiling the other one.

Hmm, debian could be done through debbuild, but i don't know about freebsd. I was thinking about making it an option. packagebuild=yes|no

But if there's no downtime, the only advantage that you have then is that you can make packages on the testserver, update that one and then update the others quickly without using any of their processor capacity.

Probably not worth the mess.

06-10-2007, 08:12 PM
I believe there is definitely down time during some rebuilds. That's why we don't rebuild software unless there's a good reason; if it's not broken, we don't fix it just because there's a new version available.

My feeling is you can do what you want to do now. You can compile on your current server, create RPMs, and install the RPMs on the other servers.

I think there are even simple third-party packages for RPM available.

Check out CheckInstall (http://asic-linux.com.mx/~izto/checkinstall/).


06-10-2007, 08:47 PM
>>Check out CheckInstall.

Very usefull, i was looking for something like that!

Hmm, yes, though I thought red had went with php 5 and doesn't have a php4 package available anymore. Thats why it is very usefull directadmin includes its own code and rpms instead of depending on the operating system's own packages.

But if you believe there's downtime too, dont you agree then that creating an rpm and installing that, instead of recompiling would be usefull?

06-10-2007, 08:54 PM
When JBMC first started publishing DA it worked on RedHat only. If it still worked on RedHat only, I'd agree with you.

But poeple asked for DA on other platforms and DirectAdmin complied. The price of configurability is complexity.

DirectAdmin staff already create some packages for some daemons, but if they did it for all, then updates would be few and far between.

Don't forget it's the make install step that actually installs each program, not the make. So you can always make everything first, then make install everything at the end.

And I don't claim I know there's downtime, only that it sounds reasonable there might be.


06-10-2007, 09:43 PM
Hmm, the way you're saying things, i think "make"ing everything first, and then make-installing everything as last step would do it as well, and be far less difficult.

I wonder, smtalk, what do you think of this?

06-10-2007, 10:02 PM
On second thought, maybe it's best to just leave things this way. At least it'll work and the process will be more easy to understand :).

If i figure out what causes downtime and what doesn't i'll put it here again...

06-11-2007, 08:12 PM
I did a recompile usng the command "./build all d" whenever PHP was last updated and during the make install process, Apache was unreachable. So, yes there is downtime during a recompile. Apache will be down until you do a "service httpd restart". Recompile when there are the least amount of users impacted on the system or schedule a few minutes downtime for the server if you need to update any of the components in the custombuild script.