Re: [Cooker] Bad RPMS on EXT ISO (was RE:Problem with Beta 3 ISO)
On Mon, 29 May 2000, David Hart wrote: > That's part of the problem; the installer doesn't give any errors, it > just doesn't install the bad rpms. I'm grabbing your extensions iso now, just > to do a little more checking. Yes, I reported this problem during the 7.0 beta, I guess it's still there. Always switch over to the text screen when installing Mandrake -- it's the only way to know if your CD is bad. The fact that it spits out error messages whenever it hits a bad RPM shows it can identify the situation, but the graphical installer won't mention it to you, even if one of the RPMs it can't install is glibc! Nice looking as it is, the graphical installer is still useless for anyone but a casual user -- you definately don't want to use it while installing on a serious work machine or server.
Re: [Cooker] Bad RPMS on EXT ISO (was RE:Problem with Beta 3 ISO)
David Hart wrote: > This needs attention fast. I've downloaded and checked the extentions > iso's from both free.fr and tucows, and both have the same bad rpms all over > them. Just another reason why I really, really hate the beta=iso plan. Here's > the output of "rpm -qi -p * 2> " under 7.1b3 for the Mandrake/RPMS2 dir on the > extensions iso. Comes out to around 250 rpms that haven't been installed in any > of the beta3 testing we've all been doing. I can confirm this same problem when run on the beta3 hd install made from the combined CD images as downloaded from ftp.free.fr, loop-mounted and copied into a new space. These iso images have STILL not arrived on my local aarnet mirror. While beta distribution by iso images has the advantage that if properly designed and managed updates can be very efficiently distributed, until all this is in place, I favour restoration of the tree method of distribution using a new separate mandrake-devel 7.1 beta tree, and that fast, as David requests. The cooker tree can be maintained independently at the same time. -- Regards, Ron. [AU] - sent by Mandrake Linux.
Re: [Cooker] Bad RPMS on EXT ISO (was RE:Problem with Beta 3 ISO)
> them. Just another reason why I really, really hate the beta=iso plan. Here's Is there at least an rsync-server version, which I guess would also have to be non-gzipped, at least? That would allow refreshing an ISO image and still not downloading the whole bazillion bytes every time, at least... -Tom
Re: [Cooker] Bad RPMS on EXT ISO (was RE:Problem with Beta 3 ISO)
On Mon, 29 May 2000, Tim & Val Litwiller wrote: > So why is your beta 3 iso file different than mine, I have had the best install > ever with beta 3. not 1 error all the way thru install, everything works correctly > when done. That's part of the problem; the installer doesn't give any errors, it just doesn't install the bad rpms. I'm grabbing your extensions iso now, just to do a little more checking. -- David Hart Vincity Design *Proudly sent from Linux Mandrake 6.1*
Re: [Cooker] Bad RPMS on EXT ISO (was RE:Problem with Beta 3 ISO)
So why is your beta 3 iso file different than mine, I have had the best install ever with beta 3. not 1 error all the way thru install, everything works correctly when done. A few small customizations and this install is running better than I have ever seen a Mandrake install before and I have been using mandrake since ver 5.3. here I have mounted my iso's in my web server if you want to take a look http://bcc53.bccks.com/mandrake/ you can download the iso from here if you think it will be any better. David Hart wrote: > On Mon, 29 May 2000, root wrote: > > Apparently none of the packages were installed off this bad CD. On the > > other hand, I received no error message. I didn't even realize that there > > was a problem until I started missing stuff. > > This needs attention fast. I've downloaded and checked the extentions > iso's from both free.fr and tucows, and both have the same bad rpms all over > them. Just another reason why I really, really hate the beta=iso plan. Here's > the output of "rpm -qi -p * 2> " under 7.1b3 for the Mandrake/RPMS2 dir on the > extensions iso. Comes out to around 250 rpms that haven't been installed in any > of the beta3 testing we've all been doing. > > gimp-devel-1.0.4-14mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gimp-devel-1.0.4-14mdk.i586.rpm failed > git-4.3.20-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of git-4.3.20-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > gkrellm-0.9.7-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gkrellm-0.9.7-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > glade-0.5.5-8mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of glade-0.5.5-8mdk.i586.rpm failed > Glide_V3-devel-2.60.15-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of Glide_V3-devel-2.60.15-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-audio-extra-1.0.0-9mdk.noarch.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-audio-extra-1.0.0-9mdk.noarch.rpm failed > gnome-chess-0.2.4-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-chess-0.2.4-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-core-devel-1.1.9-7mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-core-devel-1.1.9-7mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-games-devel-1.0.51-8mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-games-devel-1.0.51-8mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-libs-devel-1.0.58-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-libs-devel-1.0.58-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-objc-devel-1.0.40-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-objc-devel-1.0.40-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-pilot-devel-0.1.50-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-pilot-devel-0.1.50-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-pim-devel-1.0.55-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-pim-devel-1.0.55-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-print-devel-0.18-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-print-devel-0.18-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnome-users-guide-1.0.71-2mdk.noarch.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnome-users-guide-1.0.71-2mdk.noarch.rpm failed > gnozip-0.0.11-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnozip-0.0.11-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > gnucash-1.3.1-4mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gnucash-1.3.1-4mdk.i586.rpm failed > gob-0.93.3-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gob-0.93.3-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gperf-2.7-11mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gperf-2.7-11mdk.i586.rpm failed > gpm-devel-1.19.2-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gpm-devel-1.19.2-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gprolog-1.1.2-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gprolog-1.1.2-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > gps-0.7.1-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gps-0.7.1-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > grub-doc-0.5.94-12mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of grub-doc-0.5.94-12mdk.i586.rpm failed > gtk+mdk-devel-0.1.3-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gtk+mdk-devel-0.1.3-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gtkmm-1.2.0-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gtkmm-1.2.0-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gtkmm-devel-1.2.0-1mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gtkmm-devel-1.2.0-1mdk.i586.rpm failed > gtk-themes-1.0-1mdk.noarch.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of gtk-themes-1.0-1mdk.noarch.rpm failed > guavac-1.2-9mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of guavac-1.2-9mdk.i586.rpm failed > guile-devel-1.3.4-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of guile-devel-1.3.4-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > happy-1.6-2mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of happy-1.6-2mdk.i586.rpm failed > haskell-GTK-0.6.2-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM package > query of haskell-GTK-0.6.2-3mdk.i586.rpm failed > haskell-GTK-devel-0.6.2-3mdk.i586.rpm does not appear to be a RPM pa
