I'm creating an RPM and I need to check that a version of Java 8 is installed on the machine.
The problem is that Oracle provides version-tied RPMs with names like jdk1.8.0_45 and Redhat provides RPMs with names like java-oracle-8. I don't really care which one is installed, as long as one of them is installed, so how can I define OR condition logic on a Java 8? (Note this is for a RHEL5 or RHEL6 target, so new fangled features can't be used)
As far as I'm aware RPM has no such functionality. You cannot declare a requirement like this.
That being said what RPM does have, and which is used as a rough equivalent to this, is the concept of "Provides".
Any package can Provide: some_capability and then other packages can Require: some_capability the same way they can Require: <some_package>.
You can also Require: /some/file/path if absolutely necessary (though avoid this whenever possible).
So, you need to compare the provided capabilities of the RPMs you care about and look for any common capability that you can depend on instead. Hopefully there's something in common there you can use. If there isn't then you are left with no choice other than to drop the requirement in your RPM and hope they have it and detect it at runtime (with a startup script perhaps).
(Technically you could also do a check during %pre and exit with a failure if you can't find java somewhere but I strongly recommend not doing that.)
FYI - boolean logic in dependecy is called "Rich dependency" and is currently being introduce into RPM and will probably land in Fedora 24. See http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2014-February/003666.html
Related
Many languages' package management systems install third-party packages in a subfolder of a given project's root repository. (E.g. node_modules/, deps/, etc.) This is nice as it allows multiple versions of a single package to coexist nicely, as each is isolated to the project that depends on it.
raco by default installs packages system-wide it seems. Is there a way to tell raco it should install packages in a particular folder?
The comment is right to point you to package scopes: using a directory package scope is the most fine-grained level of control available at the level of the package manager. However, as the docs say,
Conflict checking disallows installation of the same or conflicting
package in different scopes …
It is a design decision in the Racket package system not to allow multiple versions of the same package to coexist in the same installation. The idea is that a package shouldn't make breaking changes while using the same name. One inspiration that's been mentioned is OS level package systems like Debian's, where gcc-4.7 and gcc-4.8 are different packages that install different binaries. This is very different than the practice of some other language package systems (e.g. npm), but it works out well in practice because the Racket community takes backwards-compatibility quite seriously.
This is actually Racket's second package system. The old system, PLaneT, tried to be much more opinionated, including built-in notions of versioning. The new/current system consciously removed some of those elements to create a more minimal and focused package system, which means that a great deal of what formerly had to be "built in" to Racket can now be just another package. You may be interested in a talk about the design of the package system. There was also a fair amount of discussion at the time on the mailing list, which is archived here.
If you do find you need different package versions to an extent that can't be supported by existing mechanisms, you could use a stand-alone Racket installation (rather than a system-wide one) to get a completely isolated environment. I'm sure the Racket community would also be interested in hearing about any issues you have in practice.
I need to install my Perl-based software on networked machines which aren't connected to the internet. Therefore, I would like to download specific versions and/or latest versions of the Perl modules and I would also like to know if there is an install procedure required for these modules.
Background:
The machines aren't connected to the internet for security reasons and its deemed unnecessary also.
I would place the downloaded modules on a machine that I call the 'install server' and it contains my Perl based software and would also contain the local copies of the Perl modules.
I call a machine that I want to install my Perl-based software on, the 'target machine', also not connected to the internet. There can be several target machines, each can run this software that I want to install. I log onto the target machine and run an install script which would connect to the install machine via the local network to obtain the Perl-based software and dependent Perl modules and installs them.
So I need to know:
How/Where to get specific versions of Perl modules, e.g. CGI.pm etc
How to install these Perl modules. Is it a case of just placing them in a directory somewhere, e.g. a library path and making sure that this directory path is in the #INC library path environmental variable, if it is not already?
I would prefer not to have to do anything like make install etc. as part of installing the modules. I would like to modules to be pre-compiled or prepared as necessary so it is as simple as possible to install them. I want to avoid additional dependencies like make and its configuration, and having to parse its output to check whether it was successful.
Please help me by asking the above specific questions as I am not able to change the concept of 'install machine' and 'target machine' which aren't connected to the internet - I have to provide a solution that works within this arrangement.
The usual way to solve "I want to install stuff from CPAN but without network" problems is to use a minicpan as David Dorward wrote in his answer. But since you're going one step further, saying that you'd rather not do any real installation on the client (target) machines at all, and that you want to use precompiled modules if possible, I urge you to check out PAR and specifically PAR::Repository (server) and PAR::Repository::Client.
Since this approach needs some research before you're up to speed, I wouldn't suggest it for "I just need Foo.pm" like problems. Once you're talking about a handful of dependencies and at least a handful of clients, then it becomes a more appropriate solution.
For an outline of how it works, check out the slides of my talk at YAPC::EU 2008. It also hints at solutions to the bootstrapping problem of making the PAR::Repository::Client module available on the clients (hint: PAR can generate self-contained executables).
You can create a MiniCPAN that has just the latest versions of everything from CPAN. You can insert additional, non-public modules into it with CPAN::Mini::Inject. If you need to greater control over versions (i.e. not choosing the latest versions), you might want to create a DPAN.
With any of these solutions, you can configure your CPAN client to pull from your local source. That could be a directory you know ahead of time or something that you figure out dynamically, like a CD or a thumb-drive. It's just a matter of setting up the configuration correctly.
You might be able to get away with creating operating-system packages for most of your work, but that still means you have to compile them at least the first time.
1) How/Where to get specific versions of Perl modules, e.g. CGI.pm etc
http://search.cpan.org/
If you don't want the latest version, you can get an earlier version by following the link in the breadcrumbs.
http://img.skitch.com/20091209-bu7kt3bj65374k7iijfnhrue2y.png
2) How to install these Perl modules. Is it a case of just placing them
in a directory somewhere, e.g. a library path and making sure that this
directory path is in the #INC library path environmental variable, if
it is not already?
That sometimes work, but you really should go through the perl Makefile.PL && make && make test && make install process.
Doing this would require that you manually chase all the dependencies though. You would probably be better off with something like minicpan.
I have several applications that I wish to deploy using rpm. Some of the files in my application deployments override files from other deployed packages. Simply including the new files in the deployment package will cause rpm conflicts.
I am looking for the proper way to use rpm to update/replace already installed files.
I have already come up with a few solutions but nothing seems quite right.
Maintain custom versions of the rpms containing the original files.
This seems like a large amount of work for a relatively small reward even though it feels less like a hack than some of the other possible solutions.
Include the files in the rpm with another name and copy them over in the post section.
This would work but will mean littering the system with multiple copies of the files. Also it means additional maintenance in the rpm build spec for each file.
Use wget in the post section to replace the original files from some known server.
This is similar to the copy technique but the files wouldn't even live in the rpm. This might act like a nice central configuration authority though.
Deploy the files as new files, then use symlinks to override the originals.
This is also similar to the copy technique but with less clutter. The problem here is that some files don't behave well as symlinks.
To the best of my knowledge, RPM is not designed to permit updating / replacing existing files, so anything that you do is going to be a hack.
Of the options you list, I'd choose #1 as the least bad hack if the target systems are systems that I admin (as you say, it's more work but is the cleanest solution) and a combination of #2 and #4 (symlinks where possible, copies where not) if I'm creating the RPMs for others' systems (to avoid having to distribute a bunch of RPMs, but I'd make it very clear in the docs what I'm doing).
You haven't described which files need to be updated or replaced and how they need to be updated. Depending on the answers to those questions, you may have a couple of other options:
Many programs are designed to use a single default configuration file and also to grab configuration files from a .d subdirectory. For example, Apache uses /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf and /etc/httpd/conf.d/*.conf, so your RPMs could drop files under /etc/httpd/conf.d instead of modifying /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf. And if the files that you need to modify are config files that don't follow this pattern but could be made to, you can suggest to the package maintainers that they add this capability; this wouldn't help you immediately but would make future releases easier.
For command-line utilities like sendmail and lpr that can be provided by multiple packages, the alternatives system (see man alternatives) permits more than 1 RPM that provides these utilities to be installed side by side. Again, if the files that you need to modify are command-line utilities that don't follow this pattern but could be made to, you can suggest to the package maintainers that they add this capability.
Config file changes on systems that you administer are better managed through a tool like Cfengine or Puppet rather than through custom RPMs. I think that Red Hat favors Puppet.
If I were creating the RPMs for systems I don't administer, I'd consider using a third-party tool like Bitrock and dumping all of my stuff under /opt just so I wouldn't have to stomp on files installed by other admins' RPMs.
Edit (2019): Nowadays, Software Collections offers a useful alternative. You can create packages that install somewhere under /opt, and the Software Collections tools offer a standardized way for users to opt in to using those instead of whatever's normally installed under /usr. Red Hat uses this to distribute newer versions of tools for their otherwise stable and long-lived (i.e., older) Red Hat Enterprise Linux distributions.
You can also execute rpm -U --replacefiles --replacepkgs ..., which will give you what you want.
See here for more info on RPM %files directives:
http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-files-list-directives.html
You can use the arguments from the %post and %pre sections in the RPM scriptlets to determine if you are installing, upgrading or removing packages.
If $1 is 0 - then we're removing old stuff. Targeting 0 packages installed.
If $1 is 1 - then we're installing new stuff. Targeting a total of 1 package to be installed.
If $1 is 2 or more - then we're upgrading this package and $1 represents the number of packages already installed.
These sections help with managing files among the versions.
Keep track of what you're doing between versions and consider what one might do if they were to skip a version or two.
Have consideration for these things and you should be good to go!
I'm tasked with replicating a production environment to create many test/sit environments.
One of the things I need to do is build up Perl, with all the modules which have been installed (including internal and external modules) over the years. I could just use CPAN.pm autobundle, but this will result in the test environment having much newer versions of the external modules that production has.
What is the easiest/best way to get and install (a lot of) version specific Perl modules.
bdfoy has the best large scale solution, but if you just want to install a few modules you can ask the CPAN shell to install a specific distribution by referencing a path to a tarball (relative to the top of the CPAN tree).
cpan> install MSCHWERN/Test-Simple-0.62.tar.gz
Throw a URL to BackPAN into your URL list and you can install any older version.
cpan> o conf urllist push http://backpan.perl.org/
This is in the CPAN.pm FAQ under "how do I install a 'DEVELOPER RELEASE' of a module?"
cpan install App::cpanminus
cpanm Your::Module#1.23
(Carton, as referenced in other answers, uses cpanm underneath to resolve explicit version requirements.)
Make your own CPAN mirror with exactly what you want. Stratopan.com, a service, and Pinto, tools that's built on top of, can help you do that.
The CPAN tools only install the latest version of any distribution because PAUSE only indexes the latest version. However, you can create your own, private CPAN that has exactly the distributions that you want. Once you have your own CPAN mirror with only what you want, you point your CPAN tools at only that mirror so it only installs those versions. More on that in a minute.
Now, you want to have several versions of that. You can create as many mirrors as you like, and you can also put the mirrors in source control so you can check out any version of the mirror that you like.
Tools such as CPAN::Mini::Inject can help you set up your own CPAN. Check out my talks on Slideshare for the basic examples, and some of my videos on Vimeo for some of the demonstrations. Look at anything that has "CPAN" or "BackPAN" in the title. I think I might have some stuff about it in The Perl Review too, or should by the next issue. :)
Lately, I've been working on a program called dpan (for DarkPAN) that can look at random directories, find Perl distributions in them, and create the structure and index files that you need. You run dpan, you get a URL to point your CPAN client toward, and off you go. It's part of my MyCPAN-Indexer project, which is in Github. It's not quite ready for unsupervised public use because I mostly work with corporate clients to customize their setup. If you're interested in that, feel free to ask me questions though.
Also, I recently released CPAN::PackageDetails that can help you build the right index file. It's still a bit young too, but again, if you need something special, just ask.
[It's almost five years on and this is a well-asked and well-answered question that has had a lot of views. Since this page must still come up in Google searches, an update can't hurt.]
Carton is worth mentioning here. Carton is a relatively recent tool in the same style as App::cpanminus, App::cpanoutdated, perlbrew, et. al. The author (Miyagawa) calls it "alpha" quality, but even in its current state carton helps simplify the maintenance of multiple environments of version tuned modules across machines.
Pinto too is another recent tool relevant to some of the responses (in fact one of the respondents is a contributor).
Stratopan.com is another alternative. Stratopan provides private CPANs in the cloud. You can fill your Stratopan repository with specific versions of modules (and their dependencies) and then install them using the standard Perl tool chain. The repository changes only when you decide to change it, so you'll get always get the versions of the modules that you want.
Disclaimer: I operate Stratopan.
It seems that creating a cpanfile listing all your modules and desired versions (using the == <version> syntax to lock it to a specific release) could serve well here, too. That would mean using Carton or cpanm for installing the modules.
Doing this would have the benefit of being able to quickly/easily tweak the file to test upgrading specific modules in a dev or staging environment - something that a private CPAN mirror wouldn't let you do (without creating multiple mirrors).
It seems that most of the installers for Perl are centered around installing Perl modules, not applications. Things like ExtUtils::MakeMaker and Module::Build are very well suited for modules, but require some additional work for Web Apps.
Ideally it would be nice to be able to do the following after checking out the source from the repository:
Have missing dependencies detected
Download and install dependencies from CPAN
Run a command to "Build" the source into a final state (perform any source parsing or configuration necessary for the local environment).
Run a command to install the built files into the appropriate locations. Not only the perl modules, but also things like template (.tt) files, and CGI scripts, JS and image files that should be web-accessible.
Make sure proper permissions are set on installed files (and SELinux context if necessary).
Right now we have a system based on Module::Build that does most of this. The work was done by done by my co-worker who was learning to use Module::Build at the time, and we'd like some advice on generalizing our solution, since it's fairly app-specific right now. In particular, our system requires us to install dependencies by hand (although it does detect them).
Is there any particular system you've used that's been particularly successful? Do you have to write an installer based on Module::Build or ExtUtils::MakeMaker that's particular to your application, or is something more general available?
EDIT: To answer brian's questions below:
We can log into the machines
We do not have root access to the machines
The machines are all (ostensibly) identical builds of RHEL5 with SELinux enabled
Currently, the people installing the machines are only programmers from our group, and our source is not available to the general public. However, it's conceivable our source could eventually be installed on someone else's machines in our organization, to be installed by their programmers or systems people.
We install by checking out from the repository, though we'd like to have the option of using a distributed archive (see above).
The answer suggesting RPM is definitely a good one. Using your system's package manager can definitely make your life easier. However, it might mean you also need to package up a bunch of other Perl modules.
You might also take a look at Shipwright. This is a Perl-based tool for packaging up an app and all its Perl module dependencies. It's early days yet, but it looks promising.
As far as installing dependencies, it wouldn't be hard to simply package up a bunch of tarballs and then have you Module::Build-based solution install them. You should take a look at pip, which makes installing a module from a tarball quite trivial. You could package this with your code base and simply call it from your own installer to handle the deps.
I question whether relying on CPAN is a good idea. The CPAN shell always fetches the latest version of a distro, rather than a specific version. If you're interested in ensuring repeatable installs, it's not the right tool.
What are your limitations for installing web apps? Can you log into the machine? Are all of the machines running the same thing? Are the people installing the web apps co-workers or random people from the general public? Are the people installing this sysadmins, programmers, web managers, or something else? Do you install by distributed an archive or checking out from source control?
For most of my stuff, which involves sysadmins familiar with Perl installing in control environments, I just use MakeMaker. It's easy to get it to do all the things you listed if you know a little about MakeMaker. If you want to know more about that, ask a another question. ;) Module::Build is just as easy, though, and the way to go if you don't already like using MakeMaker.
Module::Build would be a good way to go to handle lots of different situations if the people are moderately clueful about the command line and installing software. You'll have a lot of flexibility with Module::Build, but also a bit more work. And, the cpan tool (which comes with Perl), can install from the current directory and handle dependencies for you. Just tell it to install the current directory:
$ cpan .
If you only have to install on a single platorm, you'll probably have an easier time making a package in the native format. You could even have Module::Build make that package for you so the developers have the flexibility of Module::Build, but the installers have the ease of the native process. Sticking with Module::Build also means that you could create different packages for different platforms from a single build tool.
If the people installing the web application really have no idea about command lines, CPAN, and other things, you'll probably want to use a packager and installer that doesn't scare them or make them think about what is going on, and can accurately report problems to you automatically.
As Dave points out, using a real CPAN mirror always gets you the latest version of a module, but you can also make your own "fake" CPAN mirror with exactly the distributions you want and have the normal CPAN tools install from that. For our customers, we make "CPAN on a CD" (although thumb drives are good now too). With a simple "run me" script everything gets installed in exactly the versions they need. See, for instance, my Making my own CPAN talk if you're interested in that. Again, consider the audience when you think about that. It's not something you'd hand to the general public.
Good luck, :)
I'd recommend seriously considering a package system such as RPM to do this. Even if you're running on Windows I'd consider RPM and cygwin to do the installation. You could even set up a yum or apt repository to deliver the packages to remote systems.
If you're looking for a general installer for customers running any number of OSes and distros, then the problem becomes much harder.
Take a look at PAR.
Jonathan Rockway as a small section on using this with Catalyst in his book.