Talk:Contents manifest specification: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Talk:Contents Manifest Specification moved to Talk:Contents manifest specification: lowercase until published) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:Tools are at http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/cscott/olpc-contents and they are installed on every XO. You shouldn't have to understand the details of the format; an appropriate invocation of olpc-contents-create will be performed by the .xo building tools. |
:Tools are at http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/cscott/olpc-contents and they are installed on every XO. You shouldn't have to understand the details of the format; an appropriate invocation of olpc-contents-create will be performed by the .xo building tools. |
||
: [[User:CScott|CScott]] 13:47, 6 December 2007 (EST) |
: [[User:CScott|CScott]] 13:47, 6 December 2007 (EST) |
||
lumpy_ from #olpc-devel just pointed out to me that we more-or-less reimplemented BSD's [http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=mtree&sektion=8 mtree(8)]. --[[User:Mstone|Michael Stone]] 02:35, 8 February 2008 (EST) |
|||
Revision as of 07:35, 8 February 2008
What use is this?
OK, the Activity_bundles spec says it's required, but it's a complicated gibberish format, without any tools to generate it. Is this just a useless paper spec? Do applications *actually* have to include a manifest, sign it, etc? Until there are real tools for anybody to easily make one, my app isn't gonna have one...
Let's go back to RPM, or preferably Deb. This not-invented-here packaging system is just painful.
- Tools are at http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/cscott/olpc-contents and they are installed on every XO. You shouldn't have to understand the details of the format; an appropriate invocation of olpc-contents-create will be performed by the .xo building tools.
- CScott 13:47, 6 December 2007 (EST)
lumpy_ from #olpc-devel just pointed out to me that we more-or-less reimplemented BSD's mtree(8). --Michael Stone 02:35, 8 February 2008 (EST)