Problems with repositories, please help

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnxrtp.newuser
#1

Hi,
I’ve installed qnx rpt from a cd found with a computer related italian
magazine, but I’m having trouble in installing apps from repositories.
In the cd, there are problems with the case of directory and file names,
they are uppercase while the qnx wants them lowercase, so I made a little
script to change everithyng to lowercase. Now qnx sees my repository, but it
seems that some files are missing: I have only 2 .qpk files, the others are
without any extension, so the package manager lists only 2 packages…
I haven’t a “real” modem on this pc, just a winmodem, so I cannot connect to
the net to download stuff from the www repository.
Does anybody know how to get packages from the net from a normal browser/ftp
program without using the package manager, and without downloading the full
ISO image or the 26mb self-extracting file?
Please help,

Lanugo

#2

Hi,

Does anybody know how to get packages from the net from a normal browser/ftp
program without using the package manager, and without downloading the full
ISO image or the 26mb self-extracting file?

Unfortunately this is exactly the area that made us stopping all current
actions with QNXRTP. The package management system is - in our eyes -
unusable.

To answer your question: on http://qnxstart.com someone answered it. I
tried the solution he gave there (with some modifications) but it
failed. In GENERAL I guess it is the right way to get around the BAD
package manager network game.

This is the URL to the answer mentioned:

http://www.qnxstart.com/forum-tech/index.php?request=1069

#3

The package management system is - in our eyes - unusable.

It is definitely unusable. Why can’t everybody just download the needed
packages via a normal browser / ftp client?!?

failed. In GENERAL I guess it is the right way to get around the BAD
package manager network game.

It works for me, thx.

Lanugo

#4

The package management system is - in our eyes - unusable.

Well, I don’t think it’s that bad. I have managed to function with the
package manager (actually it’s not the package manager that’s a problem,
it’s the package filesystem that has some serious bugs). If the package
filesystem seems overly confusing, it is probably because you are
thinking in uni-processor architecture terms (for this case that package
filesystem would indeed be a Rube Goldberg device). In a
multi-processor architecture system however, the package filesystem
starts to look like a pretty good idea (for instance, you can distribute
software for multiple architectures, and the correct executables (i.e.
x86/PPC/ARM) always end up appearing in /bin (all magically, and in a
standard way). You can even unplug a hard-drive from a x86 box, walk
over to a PPC box, plug it in, and boot up (assuming you have an x86
image in /.boot, and a PPC image in /.altboot). I don’t know of any
other OS that is capable of processor portability with such ease
(perhaps a system with dynamic links would have the potential of being
this easy, but I know of no implementations that ever achieved this
degree of seamlessness). So while the package filesystem might seem
like a pain in the neck right now, it will end up being a blessing (once
it has all the kinks worked out).

Of course, if you have no interest in processor portability then I can
see how the package filesystem in its current state could be a source of
frustration.