Re: Re: php-pear .rpm install format

From: Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 06:47:04 +0000
Subject: Re: Re: php-pear .rpm install format
References: 1 2  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-9926@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 09:08, Manuel Lemos wrote: > Hello, > > On 10/03/2002 02:34 AM, Ernani Joppert Pontes Martins wrote: > > Hi guys, I was wondering to know how to install pear from rpm? > > > > Will this be available? > > > > That's because it is more flexible to install, it checks dependencies, > > increase file security, etc. > > Yes, that has been proposed by several people. It would make it easier > for PHP/PEAR to have greater acceptance among platforms that use the RPM > format. > > It also addresses the problem of the lack of cryptographic integrity > that is currently not addressed by PEAR packages. Soon or later we will > see the security bug busters claiming that anybody can hack the PEAR > hackers and cause major security havoc because PEAR installer could not > realized if a package have been hacked. > > Some people seem to reject the idea because they claim that RPM is not a > natural format in all platforms. So it isn't tar.gz but that did not > prevented from developing a basic tar archiver replacement. > > Adopting RPM would indeed avoid the need to re-invent the wheel. It is a > natural format for shipping packages with all the features that are needed. The PEAR package format is designed to be wrapped in other package formats, such as RPM. Somebody just has to make a "pear2rpm" tool. PEAR does also have support for package signatures (see "pear sign" command), but we have a logistical problem in making sure everyone supports some form of PGP signature verification. Signature verification is not implemented yet, but I'll add that before PHP 4.3 / PEAR 1.0. And finally, the PEAR package format is _not_ re-inventing the wheel. A separate format, with package contents and meta-information easily separately available, was a conscious design decision, made from the reasoning that other package formats are in practice too bound to their native operating system, and that it's better to provide something portable that these package systems can wrap. I have no immediate desire to port RPM to Windows ME or Darwin, breaking the problem up makes much more sense. - Stig -- Stig Sæther Bakken, Fast Search & Transfer ASA, Trondheim, Norway http://pear.php.net/wishlist.php/ssb

« previous php.pear.dev (#9926) next »