Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
le mer 05-12-2001 à 18:04, Guillaume Rousse a écrit : > Ainsi parlait Borsenkow Andrej : > > - our (your) own tools like urpmi do not know what to do with them; > > you'd have to at least add all of them into inst.list or add support for > > wildcards > Yep. Urpmi --auto-select fetches kernel-source-2.4.13-12mdk and > kernel-headers-2.4.16-16mdk > - how can i have matching kernel source and kernel header packages ? > - why doesn't rpmdrake show all available kernel packages ? oh they had deactivated kernel in the list of available packages in rpmdrake. They should reactivate it now. > - how can i have this same list without launching the GUI ? urpmi -a kernel ? but the problem is that it doesn't work at it should and I'm so bad in perl that I'd rather not have a look in CVS. in fact urpmi -a motif should look for the substring motif in the list of all available packages and propose them to the user. If the user is ok, so it should install them all with the dependancies. Or we should be able to use urpmq ( a little bit like rpm -qa | grep motif ) we may have the possibility to do urpmq -a motif It's easy to do in perl ( i have a version of urpmf with a clean urpmf --description motif ) but ...it use parsehdlist and this is a C prog called from a shell script -- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/linux_wizard/index.html - Oh, `no attitude,' eh? Not `in your face,' huh? Well, you can cram it with walnuts, ugly! -- Homer Simpson The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
le mer 05-12-2001 à 18:53, Cain Brian-BCAIN1 a écrit : > > b) Your lines are *WAY* too long! Keep it down to ~72 chars! > > Sorry about that. Perhaps I should know better than to > use Outlook as a mail client (manually wrapping lines sucks). > > -Brian Outlook ,! I believed you were under Linux ? Outlook sucks as a mail agent -- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/linux_wizard/index.html - Ne frappez pas qqn avec des lunettes; frappez-le avec une batte.
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> -Original Message- > From: Alexander Skwar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > So sprach »Cain Brian-BCAIN1« am 2001-12-05 um 10:37:53 -0600 : > > > Isn't this the whole purpose for Cooker? I use cooker on my ... > Did you read Juans mail? He explained that he wants to have multiple Feelin' pretty stupid about now. I think I'll take a more passive stance on the list (or at least read the entire thread before contributing to it). ... > a) Don't cc me! I read the list! Hm. I thought it was convenient when people CCd me, even when I read the list. Consider me informed. > b) Your lines are *WAY* too long! Keep it down to ~72 chars! Sorry about that. Perhaps I should know better than to use Outlook as a mail client (manually wrapping lines sucks). -Brian
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
Ainsi parlait Borsenkow Andrej : > - our (your) own tools like urpmi do not know what to do with them; > you'd have to at least add all of them into inst.list or add support for > wildcards Yep. Urpmi --auto-select fetches kernel-source-2.4.13-12mdk and kernel-headers-2.4.16-16mdk - how can i have matching kernel source and kernel header packages ? - why doesn't rpmdrake show all available kernel packages ? - how can i have this same list without launching the GUI ? -- Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPG key http://lis.snv.jussieu.fr/~rousse/gpgkey.html
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
So sprach »Cain Brian-BCAIN1« am 2001-12-05 um 10:37:53 -0600 : > Isn't this the whole purpose for Cooker? I use cooker on my > "production" machine, knowing all along that it shouldn't be > considered stable. It seems like you're advocating yet another > unstable branch for Mandrake Linux? The only reason I could see that > there would be a need for it is if you think that there should be > three branches - "stable", "kinda stable", "experimental". Did you read Juans mail? He explained that he wants to have multiple kernels, so that newer kernels get into cooker faster. Before the new naming scheme, cooker stayed with old kernels, because the Mandrakes were afraid to break Cooker by introducing a bad kernel. The way it is now, Cooker can hava a known good kernel (named »kernel«) plus as many test kernels as you wish. I honestly think that this is an improvement. However, I do not agree with the new naming scheme. PS: a) Don't cc me! I read the list! b) Your lines are *WAY* too long! Keep it down to ~72 chars! Alexander Skwar -- >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 22 hours 49 minutes
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> -Original Message- > From: Alexander Skwar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > So sprach »Yves Duret« am 2001-12-05 um 15:00:24 +0100 : > > patches from everywhere without the risk of breaking > cooker. if the new one is > > stable enough, the older goes away and so on... > > Hm, if that's the goal, what about having: > > Name: kernel ... > and for the experimental kernel: > > Name: kernel-test ... > > This would allow the kernel hackers to experiment with a kernel, while ... Isn't this the whole purpose for Cooker? I use cooker on my "production" machine, knowing all along that it shouldn't be considered stable. It seems like you're advocating yet another unstable branch for Mandrake Linux? The only reason I could see that there would be a need for it is if you think that there should be three branches - "stable", "kinda stable", "experimental". The simplest solution for your problem would probably be just to use Mandrake kernel (and otherwise) rpms, and stay away from Cooker rpms. -Brian
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
Ainsi parlait Yves Duret : [..] > You now could be sure to reboot your station after a kernel/cooker > upgrade.. Where the thrill of bleeding edge then :-) ? -- Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPG key http://lis.snv.jussieu.fr/~rousse/gpgkey.html
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
So sprach »Yves Duret« am 2001-12-05 um 15:00:24 +0100 : > patches from everywhere without the risk of breaking cooker. if the new one is > stable enough, the older goes away and so on... Hm, if that's the goal, what about having: Name: kernel Version: Release: 1mdk (or whatever) and for the experimental kernel: Name: kernel-test Version: 2.4.16 (or whatever) Release: 1mdk (or whatever) Provides: kernel-2.4.16-1mdk This would allow the kernel hackers to experiment with a kernel, while still having a known good kernel around. Also, this would not change the name of the package every time. Wouldn't this be sufficient? Because I don't see the need to have n test kernels flying around. With my proposal, there would be only one test kernel. Alexander Skwar -- >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 22 hours 24 minutes
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> "borsenkow" == Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> borsenkow> Not mentioning that CVS has no entries for new kernels. If borsenkow> they >> are borsenkow> built from some private repository, PLEASE, move them to borsenkow> contrib. >> >> Fixed in 2.4.16.4mdk >> borsenkow> What? CVS or contribs? kernel spec file name is now again: kernel.spec >> - Cooker has an old kernel that has _all_ the features and a new >> kernel soon that is catching up. >> >> I think that the 3rd option is a clear winner, if your opinion differ, >> I will like to hear. >> borsenkow> Nothing wrong except - it does not belong into RPMS as I have already borsenkow> said. Please, make separate directory under cooker, name it kernel-test borsenkow> or how you like and place them all there. borsenkow> I repeat - these kernels do not belong to distribution, because borsenkow> - our (your) own tools like urpmi do not know what to do with them; borsenkow> you'd have to at least add all of them into inst.list or add support for borsenkow> wildcards borsenkow> - each such kernel + all sources + all docs add up 100MB. You may have borsenkow> these - some people do not. Besides, why build HTML + PDF + ... docs for borsenkow> experimental kernel? All docs are available in kernel-source package. borsenkow> I have nothing against providing them; I oppose to providing them as borsenkow> part of main distro. Fine with me also. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
Fabrice FACORAT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > If you want to remove a kernel just use the plain name : > rpm -e kernel-2.4.13-10mdk > > So I can't see the point for this new naming scheme. On top of that > mirrors seems to have problem with as I can't find them on rpmfind and > ftp.ciril.fr. > Stick to a standard naming scheme or you will be flamed by users/mirrors > mainteners. and i forget to say that permit to have 2 or more kernel on the cooker *distrib* , not only on your box... hope that i have been clearer.. -- Yves Duret [EMAIL PROTECTED] piouk toujours et meme apres !
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> > borsenkow> Not mentioning that CVS has no entries for new kernels. If they > are > borsenkow> built from some private repository, PLEASE, move them to contrib. > > Fixed in 2.4.16.4mdk > What? CVS or contribs? > - Cooker has an old kernel that has _all_ the features and a new > kernel soon that is catching up. > > I think that the 3rd option is a clear winner, if your opinion differ, > I will like to hear. > Nothing wrong except - it does not belong into RPMS as I have already said. Please, make separate directory under cooker, name it kernel-test or how you like and place them all there. I repeat - these kernels do not belong to distribution, because - our (your) own tools like urpmi do not know what to do with them; you'd have to at least add all of them into inst.list or add support for wildcards - each such kernel + all sources + all docs add up 100MB. You may have these - some people do not. Besides, why build HTML + PDF + ... docs for experimental kernel? All docs are available in kernel-source package. I have nothing against providing them; I oppose to providing them as part of main distro. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> "borsenkow" == Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> If it were only this script. Even urpmi does not know how to handle >> these versions and refuses to update both kernel and kernel-source. >> borsenkow> Not mentioning that CVS has no entries for new kernels. If they are borsenkow> built from some private repository, PLEASE, move them to contrib. Fixed in 2.4.16.4mdk borsenkow> And why 2.4.13 is not removed from mirrors? That is the whole point of this exercise, I did'nt want to remove the 2.4.13 kernel while switching to 2.4.16. 2.4.13 is _very_ stable (at least in my hardware/fs), and I wanted to have a tested 2.4.16.Xmdk before making it the default Mandrake kernel. Notice that you can still have the latest and the greatest kernel in Mandarke, just that you can also have a kernel that is still a bit older with all the addons, for instance, lastest 2.4.16 kernel don't have still: - h323 iptables support - the quota format for 2.4.13-acX branch and I think that I still miss a bit of changes for 2.4.13-ac branch. Solution is: - Cooker wait a long time to get a new kernel because all the things having been ported. - Cooker has a new kernel soon, but with only some of the features that it is supposed to have. - Cooker has an old kernel that has _all_ the features and a new kernel soon that is catching up. I think that the 3rd option is a clear winner, if your opinion differ, I will like to hear. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Wednesdayen den 5 December 2001 16.08, Juan Quintela wrote: > > "alexander" == Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > alexander> So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > >> --=-=-= > >> Name: kernel-2.4.16.3mdk Relocations: (not > >> relocateable) Version : 1 Vendor: > >> MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Tue > >> Dec 4 22:17:01 2001 > > alexander> Could somebody *please* explain this new, strange naming scheme? > What's alexander> the gain compared to > > alexander> Name: kernel > alexander> Version: 2.4.16 > alexander> Release: 3mdk > > ok, I will try. > > Reason for that is to be able to have more than one kernel in the > distribution. Until know you can have several kernels installed at Juan, this is very nice, no more deleted kernel version! Thanks for explaining it. The only problem I see is with rsync, not? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.13-12mdksmp: 1 day 8 hours 37 minutes | cpu0 @ 814.28 bm, fan 4383 rpm, temp +29°C | cpu1 @ 815.92 bm, fan 4299 rpm, temp +29.5°C
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> "oden" == Oden Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: oden> On Tuesdayen den 4 December 2001 23.47, Alexander Skwar wrote: >> So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : >> Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? >> Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= 2.4"? oden> It's even worse if you study the subject... 3mdk-1-1mdk. What's next..., oden> 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? No. Kernel naming is: kernel-2.4.16.4mdk-1-1mdk. Release is always 1md RPM version is always 1 name is: kernel + kernel_version (2.4.16) + Mandrake release of that kernel (4mdk) Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> "alexander" == Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: alexander> So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : >> --=-=-= >> Name: kernel-2.4.16.3mdk Relocations: (not relocateable) >> Version : 1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft >> Release : 1mdk Build Date: Tue Dec 4 22:17:01 2001 alexander> Could somebody *please* explain this new, strange naming scheme? What's alexander> the gain compared to alexander> Name: kernel alexander> Version: 2.4.16 alexander> Release: 3mdk ok, I will try. Reason for that is to be able to have more than one kernel in the distribution. Until know you can have several kernels installed at home, but not several kernels in the distribution. Namelly, if you skip kernel-2.4.13-19mdk, install kernel-2.4.13-20mdk, and it don't work, there is no way that you can find the old kernel-2.4.13-19mdk, that perhaps works for you. With the new scheme all the kernels will have a different name, that way, all the kernels will be different, and they can stay in the distro without any problems. I asked for being able to have more than one kernel in cooker. Upper level came with that proposal, that _all_ the kernels can be there. It also fixed some problems with upgrades, but I don't know too much about how this fixed that problem. alexander> And for the older/newer kernels: alexander> Name: kernel-2.2 or kernel-2.5 alexander> Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? alexander> Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= 2.4"? No, each new kernel provides the old names: kernel = 2.4.X Gain as that you can have in the mirros more than one kernel, and that upgrading your distro don't change your kernel, you can install a new kernel, but not upgrade the kernel. Notice that kernel is special anyway, as for having efect the installing of a new kernel, you need to reboot. It is the only packages that needs that. And yes, I also know that the new kernel naming: - fix some problems with old kernel naming. - add some problems that was not there. And I don't know if it provekes more problems that it solves or the other way around. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
i dont understand this. if this nameing is to allow 2 versions of the kernel (one stable and one not) why not just name one kernel-experimental-2.4.16-3mdk, or somthing to that effect? -- Brad Wyman bradw at sta-care.com PGP Fingerprint: 8B1E E12F 3982 0D54 E01C DFD3 898B 6CA3 ED6F 3E56 -- Arthur Dent: "What's so unpleasant about being drunk?" Ford Prefect: "You ask a glass of water." - Douglas Noel Adams, 1952 - 2001 - DNA, so long and thanks for all the books
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? > > to have two or more kernel 2.4 in cooker > for example a stable one, and an another one whwere juan&chmou can apply > patches from everywhere without the risk of breaking cooker. if the new one > is > stable enough, the older goes away and so on... > You now could be sure to reboot your station after a kernel/cooker upgrade.. If it is unstable version and not built off official SPECS then by all means, PLEASE, MOVE IT INTO CONTRIBS! And call it normally. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
le mer 05-12-2001 à 15:00, Yves Duret a écrit : > Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > > > --=-=-= > > > Name: kernel-2.4.16.3mdk Relocations: (not relocateable) > > > Version : 1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft > > > Release : 1mdk Build Date: Tue Dec 4 22:17:01 2001 > > Could somebody *please* explain this new, strange naming scheme? What's > > the gain compared to > > Name: kernel > > Version: 2.4.16 > > Release: 3mdk > > And for the older/newer kernels: > > Name: kernel-2.2 or kernel-2.5 > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? > to have two or more kernel 2.4 in cooker > for example a stable one, and an another one whwere juan&chmou can apply > patches from everywhere without the risk of breaking cooker. if the new one is > stable enough, the older goes away and so on... > You now could be sure to reboot your station after a kernel/cooker upgrade.. what ? just do an rpm -ivh and use real names and not symlinks names in boot loader config file. i.e add this to menu.lst : title 2413-6 kernel (hd2,0)/vmlinuz-2.4.13-6mdk devfs=mount hdc=ide-scsi quiet vga=788 root=/dev/sdb6 initrd (hd2,0)/initrd-2.4.13-6mdk.img if all kernel use this policy, upgrade will never be a problem. even during install you should use this : title linux kernel (hd2,0)/vmlinuz-2.4.8-26mdk hdc=ide-scsi quiet vga=788 initrd (hd2,0)/initrd-2.4.8-26mdk.img So even if you follow to do the siymlinks in /boot it will not be a problem. Normally urpmi support install mode ( -ivh ) thakns to inst.list ( see /etc/urpmi/inst.list ), so now by default kernel will be installed. [root@bastard hotkeys-0.5.4]# rpm -q kernel kernel-2.4.13-6mdk kernel-2.4.13-10mdk kernel-2.4.13-12mdk If you want to remove a kernel just use the plain name : rpm -e kernel-2.4.13-10mdk So I can't see the point for this new naming scheme. On top of that mirrors seems to have problem with as I can't find them on rpmfind and ftp.ciril.fr. Stick to a standard naming scheme or you will be flamed by users/mirrors mainteners. -- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/linux_wizard/index.html - I put contact lenses in my dog's eyes. They had little pictures of cats on them. Then I took one out and he ran around in circles. -- Steven Wright
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > > --=-=-= > > Name: kernel-2.4.16.3mdk Relocations: (not relocateable) > > Version : 1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft > > Release : 1mdk Build Date: Tue Dec 4 22:17:01 2001 > > Could somebody *please* explain this new, strange naming scheme? What's > the gain compared to > > Name: kernel > Version: 2.4.16 > Release: 3mdk > > And for the older/newer kernels: > > Name: kernel-2.2 or kernel-2.5 > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? to have two or more kernel 2.4 in cooker for example a stable one, and an another one whwere juan&chmou can apply patches from everywhere without the risk of breaking cooker. if the new one is stable enough, the older goes away and so on... You now could be sure to reboot your station after a kernel/cooker upgrade.. -- Yves Duret [EMAIL PROTECTED] piouk toujours et meme apres !
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
So sprach »Stefan van der Eijk« am 2001-12-05 um 08:03:39 +0800 : > Yes! Can't you see this is a great innovation? Let's do the rest of the > packages in cooker this way too! > > The adavantages are obvious: When you update a package, there's no need > to think about the version in the changelog tag, it's always 1-1mdk! ;) Oh, what a fool I am. Yes, you are right, this makes things a lot easier! Hey, I've got another "improvement": Do away with the version numbers completely. After all, they are just confusing the users :) Do "kernel-1-1mdk" *G* Alexander Skwar -- >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 13 hours 22 minutes
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> If it were only this script. Even urpmi does not know how to handle > these versions and refuses to update both kernel and kernel-source. > Not mentioning that CVS has no entries for new kernels. If they are built from some private repository, PLEASE, move them to contrib. And why 2.4.13 is not removed from mirrors?
RE: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cooker-owner@linux- > mandrake.com] On Behalf Of Charles Shirley > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk > > On Tuesday 04 December 2001 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > > On Tuesdayen den 4 December 2001 23.47, Alexander Skwar wrote: > > > So sprach >Juan Quintela< am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > > > > > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package > > > each time? Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= > > > 2.4"? > > > > It's even worse if you study the subject... 3mdk-1-1mdk. What's > > next..., 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? > > No kidding! Not to mention that Ron Stodden's rsysnc scripts don't > know how to handle it. If it were only this script. Even urpmi does not know how to handle these versions and refuses to update both kernel and kernel-source. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 19:03, Stefan van der Eijk wrote: > Alexander Skwar wrote: > > >So sprach »Blue Lizard« am 2001-12-04 um 18:11:50 -0500 : > > > >>On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > >> > >>>3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? > >>> > >>Well it looks like Juan has semi fixed it, but why replace the dash with > >>a dot? > >> > > > >Hm? Where did Juan semi fix it? And actually, your question is the > >wrong way around! RPM provides a "Version" field for a reason. And it > >used to work fine when Version still was version; or did I miss > >something? > > > Yes! Can't you see this is a great innovation? Let's do the rest of the > packages in cooker this way too! > > The adavantages are obvious: When you update a package, there's no need > to think about the version in the changelog tag, it's always 1-1mdk! > > Stefan > > > heh. Gotta love it.
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 18:52, Alexander Skwar wrote: > So sprach »Blue Lizard« am 2001-12-04 um 18:11:50 -0500 : > > On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > > > 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? > > > > > Well it looks like Juan has semi fixed it, but why replace the dash with > > a dot? > > Hm? Where did Juan semi fix it? And actually, your question is the > wrong way around! RPM provides a "Version" field for a reason. And it > used to work fine when Version still was version; or did I miss > something? > Well, I coulda sworn I saw a changelog notice for somemdk with a version that would result in kernel-2.4.16.3mdk.i586.rpm instead of kernel-2.4.16-3mdk.i586.rpm or was I dreaming? May not have been 3...dunno. Oh well. > Alexander Skwar > -- > >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << > > iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen >Uptime: 5 hours 55 minutes >
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
Alexander Skwar wrote: >So sprach »Blue Lizard« am 2001-12-04 um 18:11:50 -0500 : > >>On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: >> >>>3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? >>> >>Well it looks like Juan has semi fixed it, but why replace the dash with >>a dot? >> > >Hm? Where did Juan semi fix it? And actually, your question is the >wrong way around! RPM provides a "Version" field for a reason. And it >used to work fine when Version still was version; or did I miss >something? > Yes! Can't you see this is a great innovation? Let's do the rest of the packages in cooker this way too! The adavantages are obvious: When you update a package, there's no need to think about the version in the changelog tag, it's always 1-1mdk! Stefan
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
So sprach »Blue Lizard« am 2001-12-04 um 18:11:50 -0500 : > On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > > 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? > > > Well it looks like Juan has semi fixed it, but why replace the dash with > a dot? Hm? Where did Juan semi fix it? And actually, your question is the wrong way around! RPM provides a "Version" field for a reason. And it used to work fine when Version still was version; or did I miss something? Alexander Skwar -- >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 5 hours 55 minutes
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Tuesday 04 December 2001 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > On Tuesdayen den 4 December 2001 23.47, Alexander Skwar wrote: > > So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > > > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package > > each time? Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= > > 2.4"? > > It's even worse if you study the subject... 3mdk-1-1mdk. What's > next..., 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? No kidding! Not to mention that Ron Stodden's rsysnc scripts don't know how to handle it. Since this change was enacted, It deletes the previous kernel and downloads the entinre new set of packages. Not that it makes much of a difference, especially in the binary packages... Still I'm sure there was some amount of improvement. Oh well... Whatever... -- ~Chuck
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 17:56, Oden Eriksson wrote: > On Tuesdayen den 4 December 2001 23.47, Alexander Skwar wrote: > > So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > > > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? > > Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= 2.4"? > > It's even worse if you study the subject... 3mdk-1-1mdk. What's next..., > 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? > Well it looks like Juan has semi fixed it, but why replace the dash with a dot? > -- > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. > | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 > | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.13-12mdksmp: 16 hours 8 minutes > | cpu0 @ 814.28 bm, fan 4440 rpm, temp +29°C > | cpu1 @ 815.92 bm, fan 4326 rpm, temp +29.5°C >
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
On Tuesdayen den 4 December 2001 23.47, Alexander Skwar wrote: > So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? > Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= 2.4"? It's even worse if you study the subject... 3mdk-1-1mdk. What's next..., 3mdk-1-1mdk-1.0-145mdk-ac12-167.14.mdk-23-mdksmp ? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.13-12mdksmp: 16 hours 8 minutes | cpu0 @ 814.28 bm, fan 4440 rpm, temp +29°C | cpu1 @ 815.92 bm, fan 4326 rpm, temp +29.5°C
[Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] kernel-2.4.16.3mdk-1-1mdk
So sprach »Juan Quintela« am 2001-12-04 um 23:15:20 +0100 : > --=-=-= > Name: kernel-2.4.16.3mdk Relocations: (not relocateable) > Version : 1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft > Release : 1mdk Build Date: Tue Dec 4 22:17:01 2001 Could somebody *please* explain this new, strange naming scheme? What's the gain compared to Name: kernel Version: 2.4.16 Release: 3mdk And for the older/newer kernels: Name: kernel-2.2 or kernel-2.5 Really, what's gained by changing the *name* of the package each time? Won't this break stuff that "Requires: kernel >= 2.4"? Alexander Skwar -- >> Wohnung in Gelsenkirchen und Umgebung gesucht! << iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 4 hours 50 minutes
