Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > I think I've illustrated the process at this point. I have a tradeoff > between not having crm114 at all and not having certain features that I may > or may not use in a program that I use once in a blue moon (but blue moons > happen, and I have used scalpel a few times in the past) I'll probably > end up doing a yum remove of scalpel, excluding the EPEL and the CERT > Forensics versions of scalpel in the respective repo files in > /etc/yum.repos.d, and then reinstalling scalpel, which should pull the > RPMforge one, and make the crm114 install possible. But odds are pretty good that you could grab the scalpel src rpm from epel and fix it to rebuild against the newer libtre in a matter of minutes. - just changing the spec, not the source... Stuff like that does happen, but it's rare (what, one conflict out of thousands of packages?) and it is usually a lot less trouble to work around than to avoid the repositories and routinely build source from tarballs yourself. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 09:22:34 PM Kaushal Shriyan wrote: > Thanks for the explanation. Please help me understand when i install CentOS > 5.8 on a fresh server, what are the available repositories by default yum repolist enabled That command works on both CentOS 6.2 and CentOS 5.8. Use that command after install and you have your answer; use that command on any server you have and you can see what repos were used to get the software set installed (the yum-utils package includes other tools that can help you visualize the dependency tree). > and > if i need any packages which are not there in the default repos, Do i need > to enable third party repositories. I will put forth the goal of enabling the fewest possible repos. So you'd want to carefully think about which repo or repos to use if your desired package is found in more than one, as well as the differences between the way these packages are built. I have two examples. First, if you have a machine with an Intel GMA integrated video devices (say a 915, 945, or 965 chipset or even newer) you may need the ELrepo xorg-x11-drv-intel instead of the provided one in CentOS. Second, if you need the xrdp package (RDP remote desktop connections to a Linux desktop), EPEL and repoforge have two different versions: # repoquery --repoid=rpmforge xrdp xrdp-0:0.4.0-1.el6.rf.i686 # repoquery --repoid=epel xrdp xrdp-0:0.5.0-0.13.el6.i686 The 0.4.0 xrdp is some different from the 0.5.0 version, and those differences by be significant for a particular use. The repoquery tool is found in the yum-utils package. Now, having RPMforge and EPEL enabled on the same machine can be an adventure. As an example, suppose I have a server (an upstream EL6 server in this case) which is serving remote desktop connections, being used for digital forensics with the scalpel file carver, and I'm wanting to make it my small consultancy's e-mail server and use the crm114 system to help with anti-spam. A yum install of the latest xrdp will pull from EPEL. A yum install of the latest scalpel will pull from EPEL. So far so good. Now: [root@www ~]# yum install crm114 Loaded plugins: product-id, refresh-packagekit, rhnplugin, subscription-manager Updating certificate-based repositories. Setting up Install Process Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package crm114.i686 0:20100106-3.el6.rf will be installed --> Processing Dependency: libtre.so.5 for package: crm114-20100106-3.el6.rf.i686 --> Running transaction check ---> Package tre.i686 0:0.7.6-2.el6 will be updated --> Processing Dependency: libtre.so.4 for package: scalpel-2.0-1.el6.i686 ---> Package tre.i686 0:0.8.0-1.el6.rf will be an update --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: scalpel-2.0-1.el6.i686 (@epel) Requires: libtre.so.4 Removing: tre-0.7.6-2.el6.i686 (@epel) libtre.so.4 Updated By: tre-0.8.0-1.el6.rf.i686 (rpmforge) Not found You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest [root@www ~]# Hmmm, looks like I need some more hardware or a VM to run the e-mail (as this is a multiprocessor pre-em64t Xeon with loads of RAM and large disk, i686 is a reasonable option, but KVM isn't by default available and no em64t Xeons are available for the chipset and sockets on this particular SuperMicro motherboardand it's not fully depreciated yet, either, and newer hardware is not in this year's budget, but I am open to donations:-) ). Or I need to rebuild scalpel myself to be compatible with the RPMforge tre package. Or I can wait on EPEL to catch up on tre. Or I can use the RPMforge scalpel (a lower version scalpel, but a higher version tre in this case): [root@www ~]# repoquery --repoid=epel scalpel tre scalpel-0:2.0-1.el6.i686 tre-0:0.7.6-2.el6.i686 [root@www ~]# repoquery --repoid=rpmforge scalpel tre scalpel-0:1.60-1.el6.rf.i686 tre-0:0.8.0-1.el6.rf.i686 [root@www ~]# Oh, but: [root@www ~]# repoquery --repoid=forensics scalpel tre scalpel-0:2.0-1.el6.i386 [root@www ~]# (That's the CERT Forensics repo; I haven't checked to see which tre its scalpel is built against.) This is not a contrived example; this is my own box, and I wanted to do this very thing not too long ago. I haven't solved that problem yet, and haven't installed crm114 either, due to time constraints. It would depend entirely on whether I really have to have the features in scalpel 2.0, or if scalpel 1.60 is good enough (the scalpel website lists: "As for v2.0, Scalpel supports regular expressions for headers and footers, minimum carve sizes, multithreading and asynchronous I/O, and beta-level support for GPU-accelerated file carving. ") Hmmm, GPU accelerated file carving sounds interesting, but my system doesn't have a GPU capable of helping much. Multithreading and async I/O, plus regexp for headers and footers while I haven't needed th
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
Kaushal Shriyan wrote on 05/23/2012 09:22 PM: > Thanks for the explanation. Please help me understand when i install CentOS > 5.8 on a fresh server, what are the available repositories by default and > if i need any packages which are not there in the default repos, Do i need > to enable third party repositories. On a fresh install only CentOS repositories are installed, and only a subset of those ([base] [updates] [extras]) is enabled. Only you can determine if you need 3rd party repos and if so which. If you need help determining which repos fit your needs, beyond the information on the Wiki repositories pages and links supplied there, then ask on this list or other support venues, such as IRC or fora. The better you can explain what you need, and why core packages do not meet those needs, the better advice you might expect as to what 3rd party repos and packages may fulfill your requirements. Phil ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: >> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: >>> >>> 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with any >>> other third-party repository; >> >> True enough as a fact, but it sort-of sounds like a criticism for >> something that's not really practical. > > Whether you interpret it as criticism is your brain's doing, Lamar's > sentence is simply stating a well-documented fact. > And it is very practical and relevant in a thread about repositories > (note the trailing *S*). Yes, but it just seems odd to single out EPEL in that regard. In the general case, hardly any third party repositories coordinate with each other and when they do at all the most common scenario (remi, for example) is that they expect you to have EPEL enabled for dependencies. But back to the OP's last question. You don't 'need' to enable 3rd party repositories at all to use Centos or keep it updated. It will install with the Centos repositories enabled and you can subsequently 'yum install' anything that is part of the distribution and a 'yum update' will track anything installed from there. However, there is a great variety of additional free software that can be added and kept up to date with almost no additional effort from additional repositories. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
Les Mikesell wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: >> >> 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with any >> other third-party repository; > > True enough as a fact, but it sort-of sounds like a criticism for > something that's not really practical. Whether you interpret it as criticism is your brain's doing, Lamar's sentence is simply stating a well-documented fact. And it is very practical and relevant in a thread about repositories (note the trailing *S*). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 01:11:54 PM Les Mikesell wrote: > > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > > > 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with > any other third-party repository; > > > True enough as a fact, but it sort-of sounds like a criticism for > > something that's not really practical. > > I'll just point to the EPEL section of the wiki.centos.org Repositories > page, and let that say almost all that really needs to be said, other than > I will say that I chose my wording for that sentence rather carefully, > since I didn't want it to sound like a complaint, and only hit send after > making multiple revisions. > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > Thanks for the explanation. Please help me understand when i install CentOS 5.8 on a fresh server, what are the available repositories by default and if i need any packages which are not there in the default repos, Do i need to enable third party repositories. Regards Kaushal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 01:11:54 PM Les Mikesell wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > > 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with any > > other third-party repository; > True enough as a fact, but it sort-of sounds like a criticism for > something that's not really practical. I'll just point to the EPEL section of the wiki.centos.org Repositories page, and let that say almost all that really needs to be said, other than I will say that I chose my wording for that sentence rather carefully, since I didn't want it to sound like a complaint, and only hit send after making multiple revisions. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > > 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with any > other third-party repository; True enough as a fact, but it sort-of sounds like a criticism for something that's not really practical. Normally packages would be accepted into EPEL if they meet the guidelines and there is usually some reason if they are elsewhere. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 12:17:07 PM Kaushal Shriyan wrote: > I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me about > various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos ( > http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it in > Production environment. You've already gotten some excellent advice about this, but I'd like to add a few things, starting with a list of just a few factoids I've observed about repos and repo mixing: 1.) EPEL doesn't make it a priority (or even a goal) to work well with any other third-party repository; 2.) The mixability of other repos varies, with both repoforge/RPMforge and ELrepo taking pains to not overwrite base repo packages unless you enable their 'extras' sub-repos (others may as well, I'm speaking from my own experience, and the repos I use the most are EPEL, repoforge, and ELrepo, and so I'm not even going to comment about the mixability of others, like remi, IUS, ATrpms, or others since I have either insufficient or old information about them); 3.) At least one useful repository that I use on certain production machines, the CERT Forensics repo, relies on both EPEL and RPMforge/repoforge, so look carefully at the mixing issues of each of your selected repos' upstream repo dependencies; 4.) Random mixing of packages (like random downloads from pkgs.org) is certain to cause problems; 5.) The fewer the number of repos you use the more stable your package set will be. That is especially true if you mix 'specialty' repos like OpenNMS and PacketFence (or even slightly off the wall ones like LinuxTech (which has a usable handbrake for CentOS 6, for instance)), or upstream repos like the one from the PostgreSQL RPM building project to get the latest PostgreSQL on you system; 6.) There is no such thing in repositories as 'one size fits all.' What will fit your needs depends a great deal on what 'production' is defined to be in your specific instance. (For a server in 'production' that is serving typical network service loads (file, print, web, e-mail, databases, etc) you're going to need some specific things (where 'things' is defined as the set of packages and interdependencies between packages). A 'production' research/development desktop (we have a few here) will need different things; a 'production' embedded machine controller (we have a couple of those, too) will need yet another different set of things.); 7.) You really need to look at the packages that you need for your application and then individually investigate which repo or repos has the packages that you need, built the way you need them. And look at the longevity of the repo; both RPMforge/repoforge and EPEL, for instance, have been around a while and are pretty well maintained; 8.) The recommendations on the CentOS Wiki repositories page are very good starting points, but what you specifically need in production is something you'll need to determine for yourself after doing some testing with different repos. And I'd keep some testing machines or VM's available to test various repos over time to see how they work or don't work with each other, and you might even want to build your own repository, depending upon your specific critieria; 9.) Don't mix from-source (./configure;make;make install) installed packages and packages from repositories unless: a.) You know exactly what you're doing; b.) The from-source package builds all its own dependencies (like Plone does); c.) The from-source package's author won't support it otherwise. 10.) Learn to use yum and its tools effectively to keep mixing issues at bay (priorities, plugins, and the command line parameters to enable and disable individual repositories as needed are the ones to start with); Now, a non-factoid observation: if you think about it, it's quite an amazing thing that so many people are so willing to keep repositories of packages up to date at no cost to the end-user, given the very definite benefit and value of those updates (which is why I can't really complain if a repo is a little out of date, or if two repos that aren't costing me any opex won't mix just the way I want them to) and the very real cost to the maintainer, in terms of time, stress, frustration, and money. Having kept packages up to date for public consumption before, I understand all too well the trials of a packager and the entitlement syndrome some users seem to have. And thus my last recommendation: 11.) be prepared to do some work on your own to make different repositories work together for you, and be patient with the maintainers of those repositories when they don't work together the way you might like. They don't have to listen to you, but most will listen if you approach them the right way, respectfully acknowledging their valuable contribution to your bottom line. YMMV, FWIW, IMHO, HTH, etc. __
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Markus Falb wrote: > >>> There are a lot of 3rd party repositories around, and my understanding >>> is that the only sane way is not to trust a whole repository but only >>> selected and therefore tested packages. Consequently though you will >>> have to maintain your own repository. >> >> But with EPEL and others with policies to not overwrite base packages, >> you won't get anything that you didn't explicitly install (assuming >> you trust them to follow their policy...). > > There are repositories that might not have such policies. > There are rpm downloads that are not yum-ified. Agreed - and the most likely source of conflicts is when you have installed packages from 2 different 3rd party repositories or unrelated sources. Normally any single source will test against a stock RHEL base, but not other 3rd party packages, and when package dependencies change in future updates you have the potential for conflicts. Not even copying packages to your own repository can ensure that packages from multiple different sources will be able to track future updates without conflicts. But, EPEL is fairly safe by itself and has a huge number of packages that are maintained pretty well. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On 22.5.2012 20:18, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Markus Falb wrote: >> There are a lot of 3rd party repositories around, and my understanding >> is that the only sane way is not to trust a whole repository but only >> selected and therefore tested packages. Consequently though you will >> have to maintain your own repository. > > But with EPEL and others with policies to not overwrite base packages, > you won't get anything that you didn't explicitly install (assuming > you trust them to follow their policy...). There are repositories that might not have such policies. There are rpm downloads that are not yum-ified. -- Kind Regards, Markus Falb ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Markus Falb wrote: >> >> I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me about >> various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos ( >> http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it in >> Production environment. >> >> Help me understand the pros and cons. > > There are a lot of 3rd party repositories around, and my understanding > is that the only sane way is not to trust a whole repository but only > selected and therefore tested packages. Consequently though you will > have to maintain your own repository. But with EPEL and others with policies to not overwrite base packages, you won't get anything that you didn't explicitly install (assuming you trust them to follow their policy...).A possible exception is that they consider RHEL as upstream so they might have a rare conflict with something from centos extras or testing. Also, you can make things a bit safer by setting 'enabled=0' in the yum repo config file and then when you want to install or update a package from there: yum --enablerepo=repo_name install package_name -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: >> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Kaushal Shriyan >> wrote: >>> >>> I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me >>> about various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third > party repos >>> (http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use >>> it >>> in Production environment. >>> >>> Help me understand the pros and cons. >> >> Usually you decide what packages that aren't included in the base >> distribution that you need, and then pick the repository that has them >> instead of the other way around. However EPEL is generally the first >> place to look and since it has a policy of not overwriting base >> packages there is not much risk in using it. > > The other one we use is rpmfusion, both free and non-free. They're stable > and compatible with the base CentOS repos. > > For workstations with nvidia, who want two monitors, I'm slowly moving > from rebuilding the proprietary library from nvidia to elrepo's > kmod-nvidia, although I believe I heard that it's going to move to the > base library real soon now Following myself up, I just wanted to clarify that kmod-nvidia, and it's required nvidia-x11-drv are the *only* things I pull from elrepo. Pulling randomly would result in collisions, as one base or other repo package would conflict on dependencies with an elrepo's dependencies. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Kaushal Shriyan > wrote: >> >> I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me >> about various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos >> (http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it >> in Production environment. >> >> Help me understand the pros and cons. > > Usually you decide what packages that aren't included in the base > distribution that you need, and then pick the repository that has them > instead of the other way around. However EPEL is generally the first > place to look and since it has a policy of not overwriting base > packages there is not much risk in using it. The other one we use is rpmfusion, both free and non-free. They're stable and compatible with the base CentOS repos. For workstations with nvidia, who want two monitors, I'm slowly moving from rebuilding the proprietary library from nvidia to elrepo's kmod-nvidia, although I believe I heard that it's going to move to the base library real soon now mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On 22.5.2012 18:17, Kaushal Shriyan wrote: > Hi, > > I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me about > various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos ( > http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it in > Production environment. > > Help me understand the pros and cons. There are a lot of 3rd party repositories around, and my understanding is that the only sane way is not to trust a whole repository but only selected and therefore tested packages. Consequently though you will have to maintain your own repository. -- Kind Regards, Markus Falb signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Kaushal Shriyan wrote: > > I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me about > various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos ( > http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it in > Production environment. > > Help me understand the pros and cons. Usually you decide what packages that aren't included in the base distribution that you need, and then pick the repository that has them instead of the other way around. However EPEL is generally the first place to look and since it has a policy of not overwriting base packages there is not much risk in using it. The pros are that you get access to many more applications and libraries without having to compile and update the software yourself. The cons are that in certain cases the repositories have modified or newer versions of the same packages as the base distribution which can cause conflicts in future updates. There are usually ways to work around the conflicts, but it is best to avoid them unless you have a specific need for particular modified packages. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Repositories in CentOS 5.8
Hi, I am running Cent OS 5.8 in production. Can someone please explain me about various repositories available in CentOS 5.8 and which third party repos ( http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) i should use it in Production environment. Help me understand the pros and cons. Regards Kaushal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
