Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
From: Brandon Caudle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Besides, why use a tarball, if you can get an RPM? If you don't want to use the package manager *when possible*, use Rock Linux. It *only* uses tarballs. Well you would use a tarball because when you compile the source you can compile it the way you want it to be not the way some other person wants it to be like ./configure --with-pam-smbpasswd or ./configure --with-msdfs stuff that doesn't come compiled with an rpm You can do the exact same thing with RPMs; you just use the SRC RPM. You pass the parameters you want during the rebuild stage, and you get back an RPM that has been compiled with those options, and optimized for your architecture. This way, you get the best of both worlds - software compiled with the options you want, and that keeps the database of applications that have been installed on your PC up to date. -- -- Michael J. Leone Registered Linux user #201348 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ICQ: 50453890 PGP Fingerprint: 0AA8 DC47 CB63 AE3F C739 6BF9 9AB4 1EF6 5AA5 BCDF Taking a mental stroll through the psychic park of pleasure.
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 You want the flexibility that RPM doesn't allow? 2 words: Rock Linux On Thursday 19 July 2001 19:14, Brandon Caudle wrote: - Original Message - From: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:45 AM Subject: Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 18 July 2001 23:43, Expert wrote: One must remember, age is irrelevant, one's own skill level and handicap (if applicable) is what is to be considered. Besides, why use a tarball, if you can get an RPM? If you don't want to use the package manager *when possible*, use Rock Linux. It *only* uses tarballs. Well you would use a tarball because when you compile the source you can compile it the way you want it to be not the way some other person wants it to be like ./configure --with-pam-smbpasswd or ./configure --with-msdfs stuff that doesn't come compiled with an rpm ~Brandon Caudle On Wednesday 18 July 2001 11:11 pm, so spoke Brandon Caudle: Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! - -- ++ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA http://ronandheather.dhs.org | || | Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of | | government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and | | by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. | |Thomas Jefferson| ++ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7WFrQjTz5dS9Us5wRAi2DAJ4lUrL9rVlFROfGCgV3DKWQ+kl5EwCeLibh sPe1ssLniClX3raXCrKu+Yg= =pUZn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
- Original Message - From: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:45 AM Subject: Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 18 July 2001 23:43, Expert wrote: One must remember, age is irrelevant, one's own skill level and handicap (if applicable) is what is to be considered. Besides, why use a tarball, if you can get an RPM? If you don't want to use the package manager *when possible*, use Rock Linux. It *only* uses tarballs. Well you would use a tarball because when you compile the source you can compile it the way you want it to be not the way some other person wants it to be like ./configure --with-pam-smbpasswd or ./configure --with-msdfs stuff that doesn't come compiled with an rpm ~Brandon Caudle On Wednesday 18 July 2001 11:11 pm, so spoke Brandon Caudle: Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. ASEL -- Instrument Nacogdoches, Texas N31 34.7 W094 42.6 355 MSL - -- ++ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA http://ronandheather.dhs.org | || | Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of | | government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and | | by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. | |Thomas Jefferson| ++ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7VpAsjTz5dS9Us5wRAi1XAJ4kdjOenJOA3e3h4KP/bt563AYD2ACeMFpG iTjoIZjLRSfd68pyP6dIkUQ= =ymSU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 18 July 2001 23:43, Expert wrote: One must remember, age is irrelevant, one's own skill level and handicap (if applicable) is what is to be considered. Besides, why use a tarball, if you can get an RPM? If you don't want to use the package manager *when possible*, use Rock Linux. It *only* uses tarballs. On Wednesday 18 July 2001 11:11 pm, so spoke Brandon Caudle: Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. ASEL -- Instrument Nacogdoches, Texas N31 34.7 W094 42.6 355 MSL - -- ++ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA http://ronandheather.dhs.org | || | Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of | | government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and | | by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. | |Thomas Jefferson| ++ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7VpAsjTz5dS9Us5wRAi1XAJ4kdjOenJOA3e3h4KP/bt563AYD2ACeMFpG iTjoIZjLRSfd68pyP6dIkUQ= =ymSU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
On Wednesday, Jul 18, 2001, David Rankin wrote: Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. 2.2.1a has been in Cooker since Jul 12... rpmfind.net found it just fine for me. Just remember that the Cooker is still 'experimental', so use at your own risk. =) -- Paul Cox paul at coxcentral dot com Kernel: 2.4.3-20mdk-win4lin-pcox - Uptime: 7 days 18 hours 59 minutes.
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
From: Brandon Caudle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. To keep your RPM database of installed apps correct, of course. so if he wants to do it via RPM, that's his business. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. ASEL -- Instrument Nacogdoches, Texas N31 34.7 W094 42.6 355 MSL
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
One must remember, age is irrelevant, one's own skill level and handicap (if applicable) is what is to be considered. On Wednesday 18 July 2001 11:11 pm, so spoke Brandon Caudle: Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. ASEL -- Instrument Nacogdoches, Texas N31 34.7 W094 42.6 355 MSL
Re: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake?
Come on, I'm a 15 year old kid here who just installed 2.2.1 from the gz file, your on the expert list why need rpm? you can customize the package. ~Brandon - Original Message - From: David Rankin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mandrake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: [expert] Who's Building Samba 2.2.1a for Mandrake? Who's Building the Samba 2.2.1a RPM for Mandrake? Samba.org and rpmfind.net still have 2.2.0. And depressingly enough, the 2.2.0 rpm is built for i686. I'm not adverse to building my own from the SRPM, but if someone is going to the trouble to build the rpm, please do so with for both i586 and i686 so we don't have to go through the discussion regarding alienating all the AMD K6-2 users all over the world -- again. I always prefer a Mandrake rpm over a Redhat rpm any day. Takes some of the guess work out of where the pieces will end up after install. Thanks! -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. ASEL -- Instrument Nacogdoches, Texas N31 34.7 W094 42.6 355 MSL
