jsiwek at ncsa.illinois.edu
Mon Nov 29 12:59:25 PST 2010
> By tarballs, you mean tarballs of binaries, right? I'm actually not
> sure we need those. Let's skip if nobody objects.
Right; I agree to skip.
> Let's do just generic RPMs and Mac PackageMaker (and source tarballs
> of course). No problem if the RPMs don't look perfect as long as
> they *work* fine at least on a standard RedHat system.
> > For Mac PackageMaker or tarball formats, one deficiency I remember
> > is that you can't unpack to just any directory and have bro work
> > because the default policy search dirs are set at compile time.
> Shouldn't be a problem for the Mac packages as they will install
> into a predefined location, won't they?
The user gets a choice if they have more than one volume.
> > with PackageMaker, vanilla OS X comes with all required dependencies
> > and I think it's sufficient to just ship the optional ones with the
> > package.
> Sounds good.
Instead of shipping optional libs w/ Mac package, this changed to linking statically for optional libs (libmagic, libgeoip, google perftools) as per other thread.
More information about the bro-dev