Re: [OT] News Server Help
Numberwhun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >... I was just wondering if anyone here knows of a nice, free new > server that allows unlimited downloads/uploads, without monitoring? Terra News (http://www.teranews.com/) probably doesn't fit your bill but I thought that I'd mention them anyways. ~$4 for an initial setup fee and then a *free* 50MB per day thereafter. I started using Terra News when my previous ISP wouldn't fix their broken NNTP server, and when my new employer and new ISP didn't offer or have access to one either. For the geeky groups that I subscribe to, 50MB/day is acceptable. --kevin -- The net is like a vast sea of lutefisk with tiny dinosaur brains embedded in it here and there. Any given spoonful will likely have an IQ of 1, but occasional spoonfuls may have an IQ more than six times that! -- James 'Kibo' Parry ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] News Server Help
On Feb 8, 2005, at 23:24, Numberwhun wrote: Now, I did get online with Comcast and talked about this with their tech support, but all they could come up with is, "Giganews offers unlimited access for $24.95/month". Again, why pay when it was FREE before. Does the Public Utilities Commission regulate cable? I don't know, but they have effectively raised your bill $24.95 per month. The outsourcing is just a shell game. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: OpenOffice documentation on Sarge
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 22:46 -0500, Michael ODonnell wrote: > > You probably want to say: > > apt-get install openoffice.org-help-en That did the trick! Thanks! > ...as indicated by saying: > >apt-cache search openoffice | fgrep help Coming from a Redhat background, all this apt/synaptics/... stuff is new and a bit confusing. At least there was just one command to rpm (well, there used to be just one...) --Bruce signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: OpenOffice documentation on Sarge
On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 16:11 -0500, Bruce Dawson wrote: > Coming from a Redhat background, all this apt/synaptics/... stuff is new > and a bit confusing. At least there was just one command to rpm (well, > there used to be just one...) Debian's equivalent of "rpm" is "dpkg". Apt is sort of like up2date on a large quantity of steroids. 8) -- Technical prowess can only compensate for a finite amount of managerial stupidity. - Eric Johnson Cole Tuininga Lead Developer Code Energy, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key ID: 0x43E5755D ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Linuxworld GNHLUG Boothbabes - hurding cats
Hi Gang.
At one time or another all the people on the "To: list" made the mistake of
raising their hands and saying that they would be willing to volunteer for
doing some booth duty at Linuxworld. Yes, you will be "boothbabes".
We are going to have a simple booth. We will have electrical power, but we
will not have Internet (at $1200 a drop, I said "no, can not afford it). I will
bring my laptop (but I will need to take it with me from time to time) and if
anyone else (or all of you) wants to do the same, you are welcome. I would
also suggest a lock to lock it down. We will have some sheets talking about
GNHLUG and some of the things we do and the access points for our groups.
The event is three days, effectively 1000-1700 each day, Feb 15-17th. The
last day it only goes to four o'clock. Registration opens at 0800 every
day, and with luck we will have you all pre-registered.
I think I have all of you and the issues that you have:
Brian Chabot - volunteer, but also wants to "wander around"
Ken D'Ambrosio - sign up for 15th and 16th, but needs ride from Merrimack
Ira Krakow - attending three days, volunteer for Feb. 16th
Bill Sconce - "when needed"
Ed Lawson - maybe Thursday
Don Leslie - at least one day
Thomas Charron
Steven Jones
So I will take a whack:
| Tuesday |Wednesday |Thursday |
---
maddog |X |X |X |Intermittent
-
Ira | |X | |
-
Ed | | |X |tentative
-
Ken |X |X | |needs ride
-
Don | | |X |
--
Thomas |X | | |
--
Steven |X | | |
This gives us four people on the first day, which will both be the heaviest
crowds and the most hectic day, with three each of the other days, which should
allow for people to go to the bathroom, eat lunch, wonder a BIT, etc.
I will be driving down from my home in Amherst each day, but on the 16th and
17th I have dinner meetings. I can give Ken a ride both ways on Tuesday,
but unless he wants to wait around Boston until 2000 hours on Wednesday,
someone else would have to give him a ride.
Thomas and Steven, I have put you two together on one day, but if you were
willing to split up, I would put one of you on Wednesday.
So please let me know if this is doable for you. Ken, in the worst case we
can put you on the train to Lowell, then taxi from there.
Also, if you know of anyone else who would be willing to help out, please let
me know.
Finally, I want to get all of you your own badge with your own name, title,
address, etc., but I need to know what those are, and quickly.
So I need:
First Name
Last Name
Title ("Unemployed Programmer", "Accomplished Author", etc. are good)
Address (including zip code)
Telephone number
email
You don't have to put your address, telephone number and email, but if you
don't, then
prospective employers can't contact you. If you give me this information in the
next couple of days I can put it in online and your badges will be ready for you
at the show.
Our booth is number 1331, and we are right next to the BLU booth.
If any of you can not do this schedule, or if you could do one more day, please
let me know NOW. In fact, an ACK back to me saying "yes, I can do this" would
be helpful.
Thanks,
md
--
Jon "maddog" Hall
Executive Director Linux International(R)
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 80 Amherst St.
Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
WWW: http://www.li.org
Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association
(R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries.
(R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant
to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus
Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis
(R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other
countries.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Fwd: Monadnock Linux User Group Meeting - Snow cancellation
RE: Monadnock Linux User Group, Thursday, Feb 10th, in Peterborough, NH Due to the winter storm about to hit our area and some forecasts showing a worst case of up to 20 inches of snow by tomorrow, this month's Monadnock Linux User Group meeting will be cancelled. We will resume the normal meeting schedule next month, second Thursday of the month. More announcements will follow as we get closer to that date. Guy Pardoe MonadLUG Coordinator ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: OpenOffice documentation on Sarge
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 04:27 pm, Cole Tuininga wrote: > On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 16:11 -0500, Bruce Dawson wrote: > > Coming from a Redhat background, all this apt/synaptics/... stuff is new > > and a bit confusing. At least there was just one command to rpm (well, > > there used to be just one...) > > Debian's equivalent of "rpm" is "dpkg". Apt is sort of like up2date on > a large quantity of steroids. 8) Except that it should be clarified that if you use dpkg much without knowing what you're doing, you're probably not doing it right. Use apt for more than a day and I'm sure you'll never look back at rpm. And check out apt-get.org if you find that testing/sarge doesn't quite have what you want. -N ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)
(Long-time members of this list will recognize the subject, which I drag
out whenever I get particularly irritated by all the Debian elitists who
think nobody's ever installed software before. If you're not interested in
this kind of crap, just ignore this thread.)
(The inflammatory nature of this message means I'll emphasize my usual sig
disclaimer as: EVERYTHING I SAY COULD BE A TOTAL LIE.)
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, at 4:27pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Debian's equivalent of "rpm" is "dpkg". Apt is sort of like up2date on
> a large quantity of steroids. 8)
I've never, ever been that impressed by the functionality of apt-get vs
anything else. Yes, it manages package dependencies. So do/did yum,
up2date, rpmfind, and autorpm. I've been having my RPM dependencies solved
for me for years and years. It just really ain't all that impressive. Get
over yourselves.
The size of Debian's main package repository (the "distribution", really)
is really what most Debian zealots like when they say they like apt-get.
It isn't the tool, it's the effort that goes into that repository. That
repository is one of the things that keeps bringing me back to try Debian.
Unfortunately, it appears to me that Debian people, apparently as a
universal rule, have no concept of software configuration management at all.
So as the number of packages increases, the single-large-repository model
takes longer and longer to do integration testing. That makes "stable"
doomed to be perpetually hopelessly out-of-date. Which is not good. I keep
waiting for Debian people to realize that until they break things down into
manageable chunks, they're never going to make progress.
Another really impressive but usually overlooked feature of Debian is the
general attitude that Free Software and community development are the way to
go. Things like the Debian Social Contract and the Debian Free Software
Guidelines. No other major distribution has anything like that. Debian
takes the Free Software mindset (the "bazaar" if you're an ESR fan) and
applies it to the entire distribution. That's cool.
I also like Debian's emphasis on accountability. Each package has an
official maintainer, who is ultimately responsible for that package.
You're not dealing with a faceless corporate entity. Got a problem, contact
the maintainer. Maintainers need credentials (signed keys or a photo ID),
and have an existing maintainer vouch for them. Nice.
But all the Debian zealots just say "APT rocks and RPM sux!!" and wonder
why nobody cares.
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, at 8:14pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Use apt for more than a day and I'm sure you'll never look back at rpm.
Apples and oranges. "Use yum for more then a day, and I'm sure you'll
never look back at dpkg" would be equally (in)valid.
I've used both dpkg and rpm, and IMNSHO, I think rpm is the better of the
two. Some operations are a lot faster, and others are just a lot nicer to
use ("rpm -V" and "rpm -Uvh", for example). And the build tools and source
management of rpm blow away Debian's offerings. Or they did when I last
looked at them, which was admittedly a few years ago. But given Debian's
rate of change, I don't expect it's that much different.
The one thing that dpkg/APT gives you that I haven't seen yet in the RPM
world is the idea of associated (suggested/recommended/etc.) packages.
That's something I miss.
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do |
| not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. |
| All information is provided without warranty of any kind. |
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Weird Bind issue
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, at 12:31pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This started cropping up last week. Our DNS server is running fine, then > for no reason it dies with this error: > > exiting (due to assertion failure) As Kevin Clark said, you really should know to provide more info. :) One thing that is begging to be asked is: What changed right around when the problem started happening? And I know you work in a datacenter, and I know what those are like, so don't you dare tell us "nothing changed". :) I've seen problems like that with BIND 9 on recent Red Hat releases, where a custom-compiled kernel's threading API did not match libc's threading API. Random thread functions will fail, segfault, abort, or whatever. Of course, I have no idea what distribution you're running, so that might be away off base. At a minimum, you should tell us your distribution and release, and the version of the software (i.e., BIND) that's giving you trouble. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 22:42:15 -0500 (EST), Benjamin Scott
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've never, ever been that impressed by the functionality of apt-get vs
> anything else. Yes, it manages package dependencies. So do/did yum,
> up2date, rpmfind, and autorpm. I've been having my RPM dependencies solved
> for me for years and years. It just really ain't all that impressive. Get
> over yourselves.
Mandrake's rpmdrake too. I've wondered why people refer to the RPM
dependency thing so much. It's not the packaging that does it. It's
the repository. Solaris freeware packages can be just as consistant
or not. There are lots of people making/using RPM packages. And
several distributions (Redhat, fedora, Mandrake, SuSE). How does this
compare to .deb? (btw - I haven't used Debian beyond an install).
Are there only the official Debian repositories or are there others
that don't follow the Debian standards?
> I've used both dpkg and rpm, and IMNSHO, I think rpm is the better of the
> two. Some operations are a lot faster, and others are just a lot nicer to
> use ("rpm -V" and "rpm -Uvh", for example). And the build tools and source
> management of rpm blow away Debian's offerings. Or they did when I last
> looked at them, which was admittedly a few years ago. But given Debian's
> rate of change, I don't expect it's that much different.
In my hazy memories, I recall that RPM came after dpkg and was
developed, in part, by the dpkg developer under hire from Redhat.
Naturally, he improved on some things in the .deb packaging. In any
event, .deb came before rpm and rpm learned from deb.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] News Server Help
WARNING: I'm being my usual tactless self here. :-) On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, at 11:24pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > For those of you who have Comcast cable internet, you are probably aware > that there was a recent change in their service regarding their newsserver > for news groups. I didn't even know they provided a Usenet feed. :) > Again, why pay when it was FREE before. There is no such thing as "free". You were paying for something before, and you're paying for something now. The "something" has changed. This happens all the time in the world. As much as I hate to agree with a monopoly like Comcast (and believe me, I know how much they suck), I really can't say they're out-of-line here. 2 gigabytes a month is a crapload of newsfeed. That's way above any reasonable "consumer" expectation for news. I'm a current Comcast customer myself (not because I like Comcast, but because I hate Verizon more), and frankly, I don't want to pay for Comcast to maintain a huge Usenet server to satisfy a few high-volume users like yourself. If you're gonna pull that much traffic, pay for it yourself. Information may want to be free, but infrastructure wants cash. > Ok, now that I have made the long story long instead of short, I was just > wondering if anyone here knows of a nice, free new server that allows > unlimited downloads/uploads, without monitoring? Do you know where I might find a bank that just hands out big bags of money to anyone who asks? -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 10:42:15PM -0500, Benjamin Scott wrote: > On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, at 4:27pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Debian's equivalent of "rpm" is "dpkg". Apt is sort of like up2date on > > a large quantity of steroids. 8) > > I've never, ever been that impressed by the functionality of apt-get vs > anything else. Yes, it manages package dependencies. So do/did yum, > up2date, rpmfind, and autorpm. I've been having my RPM dependencies solved > for me for years and years. It just really ain't all that impressive. Get > over yourselves. > > The size of Debian's main package repository (the "distribution", really) > is really what most Debian zealots like when they say they like apt-get. I couldn't agree more. > Unfortunately, it appears to me that Debian people, apparently as a > universal rule, have no concept of software configuration management at all. Here again, I couldn't agree more. And I also get a little incensed when I hear people tlalking about how superior Debian software is than Red Hat (or choose your favorite other distro to beat on). I've managed both of these, and others, both on my own personal systems and in corporate environments, big and small. By and large, the software is the very same software. Despite Debian's long testing cycles, they still ship with loads of strange bugs, and I seem to be good at finding them all. ;-) Red Hat isn't better; they're just different. Frankly, I'm not even all that impressed with apt's dependency resolution skills... I've come across several situations where it was impossible to install a package I wanted, because its dependencies had been removed from or otherwise didn't exist in the repository. I've also come across situations where doing a dist-upgrade completely broke my system. Red hat isn't better here either, and admittedly probably worse. But then, regardless of OS, I'd much rather do a fresh install than an upgrade any day. It's kind of like moving; it's a PITA, but it gives you a great opportunity to do house cleaning. ;-) One reason I always shied away from Debian is because it was hard to download CD images... you had to build them yourself. While I've heard that they provide all the tools to "make it easy" to build the CDs, I have to confess that I spent long enough wandering around the maze of their documentation that I just gave up. Regardless, it's an extra step that frankly, I want my distro to do for me. I've also seen Debian packages configure things in strange ways that (IMO) no self-respecting system administrator would ever imagine... In that regard, I do actually think Red Hat is better, but that may just be a matter of personal preference. > Another really impressive but usually overlooked feature of Debian is the > general attitude that Free Software and community development are the way to > go. Things like the Debian Social Contract and the Debian Free Software > Guidelines. No other major distribution has anything like that. Debian > takes the Free Software mindset (the "bazaar" if you're an ESR fan) and > applies it to the entire distribution. That's cool. Agreed too. > I also like Debian's emphasis on accountability. Each package has an > official maintainer, who is ultimately responsible for that package. > You're not dealing with a faceless corporate entity. Got a problem, contact > the maintainer. Maintainers need credentials (signed keys or a photo ID), > and have an existing maintainer vouch for them. Nice. Red Hat has something similar in their development team, but the difference is that the assigned maintainer is YAUPOWE (Yet Another Under-Paid Over-Worked Employee). But I'm not sure if there's any practical difference here. A lot of times the RH guys push stuff off on the official maintainers, who often are the Debian maintainers too. The bottom line is the better distribution is the one you find easiest to work with for whatever purpose you have in mind... Inherently, they're all about the same. -8^) [<-- I'm going bald...] -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers. pgpjrW4nLW1WA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, at 11:00pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Are there only the official Debian repositories or are there others that > don't follow the Debian standards? One does see third-party packages for Debian, and even repositories, but they're a lot less common then for, say, Red Hat/Fedora. I suspect this is mainly because it's a lot easier to get a package into Debian/sid, and once it's in it's available to everyone almost immediately. So there's just a lot less call for it. > In my hazy memories, I recall that RPM came after dpkg and was developed, > in part, by the dpkg developer under hire from Redhat. I haven't heard that before, and from what I've read, that is at least partly incorrect. Not that I'm an expert or the information I have is authoritative; far from it. But from what I've read, dpkg was born in 1994. RPP, the distant ancestor to RPM, was born around the same time. RPP was followed by PMS, then PM. Finally, RPM officially debuted in 1995 with Red Hat Linux 2.0. Of course, none of this precludes learning lessons from Debian. Certainly, RPM came well after dpkg did. References: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/project-history/ch-releases.en.html http://www.debian.or.jp/events/2002/0919-lc2002/JP-Enkai-History.html http://rikers.org/rpmbook/node9.html http://www.owlriver.com/RH-true-names.html -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 23:33:03 -0500 (EST), Benjamin Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, at 11:00pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Are there only the official Debian repositories or are there others that > > don't follow the Debian standards? > > One does see third-party packages for Debian, and even repositories, but > they're a lot less common then for, say, Red Hat/Fedora. I suspect this is > mainly because it's a lot easier to get a package into Debian/sid, and once > it's in it's available to everyone almost immediately. So there's just a > lot less call for it. That certainly make sense > > > In my hazy memories, I recall that RPM came after dpkg and was developed, > > in part, by the dpkg developer under hire from Redhat. > > I haven't heard that before, and from what I've read, that is at least > partly incorrect. Not that I'm an expert or the information I have is > authoritative; far from it. But from what I've read, dpkg was born in 1994. > RPP, the distant ancestor to RPM, was born around the same time. RPP was > followed by PMS, then PM. Finally, RPM officially debuted in 1995 with Red > Hat Linux 2.0. As I said, "hazy memories". :-) Maybe it was yggdrasil? The only "package" system I remember in wide use before Redhat came out was SLS's which Slackware continued. Not really a package though. > > Of course, none of this precludes learning lessons from Debian. > Certainly, RPM came well after dpkg did. > > References: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/project-history/ch-releases.en.html > http://www.debian.or.jp/events/2002/0919-lc2002/JP-Enkai-History.html > http://rikers.org/rpmbook/node9.html > http://www.owlriver.com/RH-true-names.html > > -- > Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | > | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | > | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | > > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss > ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Debian flamewar
Heh. I find this discussion mildly interesting from where I sit, a mostly xBSD user. It's funny, too, 'cause I didn't start using FreeBSD for my workstations and personal servers until I worked in a data center environment with mixed UNIX systems. At the University of Kentucky's College of Engineering Computing Center, we had multiple systems running HP-UX, Solaris, IRIX, Red Hat GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, and even 1 web server with OpenBSD for a certain network/clustering research group that some on this list have probably heard of. Also, the two of us in the "UNIX Support Group" were responsible for several dozen other UNIX and Linux workstations spread throughout the college and not just the servers in the back room. It was largely the issues of "package management" that made me decide to go with FreeBSD and OpenBSD for my computers at home, instead of various flavors of GNU/Linux. I found the ports collections to be the solution to deb and rpm hells. In almost every case, I cd into the program's ports directory, type 'make install' and the software builds, installs, and then runs with no hitches. There's very little to package manage and that's how it should be, IMHO. I experienced all kinds of problems on the Linux machines, mainly because we were a research institution and the profs would need some bizarre hardware combination that wouldn't quite work with the default packages from the various releases. It became a nightmare trying to maintain a machine loading packages from 2 different Debian releases, or trying to install binary RPMs on some of the RedHat machines with different kernels, etc. It soon became routine for my colleague and I to install nearly everything from source code on certain machines because we knew that the packages would not work. I have found that installing from source, and knowing what different gcc and make errors mean, is the only way to get software that will run on your machine 100% with no faults other than their own bugs or bugs in the libraries they link to. It can be time consuming to maintain a machine with source-compiled binaries, but I haven't found any update routine that's simpler or more sure-fire than: cvsup -g -L2 /home/root/sup/FreeBSD-ports-supfile pkg-delete -a cd /usr/ports/[pkg-cat]/[pkg-name] make install clean The last two lines need to be repeated for each package you wish to install. I can't count the number of times I've had apt-get update apt-get install fail and for what reasons when. I've also dealt with RPM-hell of having to install RPM after RPM, just to get the one thing that I want to use installed. I've also had installs fail on some machine, again because of custom packages needed for one reason or another. I can tell you that I've only ever had two package fail make install in FreeBSD ports because one time I updated right after a change to one package, and the second time because the package maintainer had written his makefile to check for the headers from a specific version of the mysql libs and I'd installed a more recent one. In both cases, the fixes were simple changes to the makefile that I sent off to the package maintainers. One was incorporated into the makefile, and the other maintainer wrote back thanking me, but that he'd already updated the repository with a "better" change. I've not ever had a problem with ports on OpenBSD, but I've used it much less. Oh, and don't get me started on the "package management" in IRIX, HP-UX, and Solaris. They have varying degrees of success and failure, and you often have to go to third party sources on the Internet or resort to installing things from source for the useful stuff. Anyway, to me, it isn't software without source code, and I do prefer to install from source because then you know it works with the libraries installed on your system because it was compiled against those very libraries. You don't need to worry about binary compatibility issues between different library and kernel versions busting your binary packages. Yeah, you could end up with something that doesn't compile, but at least then, you can see what the problem is and fix it yourself. Well, gee, that was longer than I anticipated. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
