Tiny Core Linux

Tiny Core Extensions => TCE Q&A Forum => Topic started by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 07:28:37 AM

Title: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 07:28:37 AM

I'd like to create a metapackage foo.tcz whose sole purpose is to load the "dependencies" listed in foo.tcz.dep.
foo.tcz would be listed in tce/onboot.lst
foo.tcz.dep would exist in tce/optional/

Just two quick questions about foo.tcz:
1. Does it have to exist at all, or is it sufficient for foo.tcz.dep to exist in tce/optional/?
2. If it does have to exist (in tce/optional/), is it okay for it to be a totally empty file?

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: Rich on January 02, 2020, 08:22:37 AM

Hi GNUser
I'm pretty sure  foo.tcz  has to exist.

Looking inside the  compiletc.tcz  meta extension it contains:

Code: [Select]

/usr/local/share/compiletc/files/READMEwhich contains the text:

Code: [Select]

This is is a meta-extension for a compile environmentHey look, I found a bug. Someone typed  is  twice in a row. ;D

The  original-modules-4.19.10-tinycore.tcz  meta extension just contains an empty  /lib  directory.

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 08:44:08 AM

Thanks, Rich. You're amazingly helpful, as always.

- I can confirm that if foo.tcz does not exist, dependencies in foo.tcz.dep don't get loaded.
- Interestingly, foo.tcz can be a completely empty file and it still works.
- That's quite the severe bug you found ;)

I look forward to trying Pure64 11.0 and helping in whatever little ways I can.

Cheers,
Bruno "GNUser"

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: Rich on January 02, 2020, 01:29:56 PM

Hi GNUser

Quote from: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 08:44:08 AM

... - Interestingly, foo.tcz can be a completely empty file and it still works. ...

That's not surprising. The first thing that happens is the dependencies get resolved and loaded. Even if  tce-load  errors out on  foo.tcz
it won't matter since it's processed last. The only side effect I see under those circumstances is  foo  won't show up in  tce.installed.

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 02:13:34 PM

I just did some tests with empty foo.tcz "metapackage" to load extensions in foo.tcz.dep. This is what I discovered after booting:

- foo shows up in output of tce-status -i
- An empty /usr/local/tce.installed/foo exists
- /tmp/tcloop/foo (an empty directory) exists

So there seem to be no cons to using an empty foo.tcz

    [EDIT]: Corrected the  tce.installed  line as requested.  Rich

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: Rich on January 02, 2020, 04:49:25 PM

Hi GNUser

Quote from: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 02:13:34 PM

I just did some tests with empty foo.tcz ...

Did you  touch foo.tcz  or use  mksquashfs  to create an empty squash file?

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 07:49:08 PM

Sorry, I should have clarified. The empty foo.tcz was created with

Code: [Select]

touch foo.tcz

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 07:51:16 PM

Rich, would you kindly correct Reply #4? Second bullet point has an extraneous .tcz. I should have written the following:
- An empty /usr/local/tce.installed/foo exists

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: Rich on January 02, 2020, 07:55:48 PM

Hi GNUser
Done. :)

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on January 02, 2020, 08:12:48 PM

Thank you :)

Title: Re: best approach to metapackages?
Post by: GNUser on February 11, 2020, 02:20:16 PM

BTW, using a completely empty extension created with touch foo.tcz causes a benign (but unsightly) error during boot when the showapps boot command is used. It has something to do with the fact that the empty extension cannot be mounted.

I guess the best approach is to create a package with a single dummy file, similar to compiletc.tcz's approach.