Re: bind install hanging @ rndc.key creation
Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: On Sat, Jan 29, 2005, F. Even wrote: Your machine has no Pseudo Random Number Generator (PRNG) or the existing PRNG has no entropy source or the entropy source doesn't provide any data. Make sure a /dev/random or at least /dev/urandom exists. For FreeBSD configure rand_irqs in /etc/rc.conf. You guys rock!! Thanks Ralf!! Added the following to /etc/rc.conf: bash-2.05b# grep rand /etc/rc.conf rand_irqs=YES ...and all is well now: bash-2.05b# /openpkg/bin/openpkg rpm -Uvh bind-9.3.0-2.2.0.ix86-freebsd4.7-openpkg.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:bind ### [100%] +--Notice-+ | Generating RSA key for RNDC operation in /openpkg/etc/bind/rndc.key. | | Please be patient, this takes a non-deterministic amount of time. | +-+ wrote key file /openpkg/etc/bind/rndc.key Thanks!! Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
bind install hanging @ rndc.key creation
Any particular reason anyone can think of that this would be hanging on my FreeBSD 4.7 box? bash-2.05b# /openpkg/bin/openpkg rpm -Uvh bind-9.3.0-2.2.0.ix86-freebsd4.7-openpkg.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:bind ### [100%] +--Notice-+ | Generating RSA key for RNDC operation in /openpkg/etc/bind/rndc.key. | | Please be patient, this takes a non-deterministic amount of time. | +-+ I've left this go for at least an hour before and it didn't complete. I've since wiped out all of the temporary files, etc., tried rebuilding it, and reinstalling, it hangs here every time. I've even rebooted the box and rebuild the rpm db. I imagine this probably has little to do with opkg itself, probably rndc not liking something on my system, but I figure if anyone here has experienced this and has a clue what might be going on, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise I guess, I'll try running it without the rndc key...as it's not that important of a feature on this particular boxI can get by...but it is kind of annoying. Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
Re: logging configuration
Thomas Lotterer wrote: On Sun, Jan 16, 2005, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: On Sun, Jan 16, 2005, F. Even wrote: Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: On Sat, Jan 15, 2005, F. Even wrote: Just add to your prefix/etc/rc.conf: postfix_log_numfiles=20 postfix_log_minsize= As already pointed out the postfix_log_minsize must not be empty because the calling program line unconditionally adds an option with expects this mandatory parameter. Set it to a very high number to effictevely disable the log rotation, e.g. Ah, ok, my fault. I should know that an empty argument is expanded away by the shell here. Well, then just use postfix_log_minsize=999G and you should be fine. Set it to zero to rotate every day no matter how small the log file is (even empty), e.g. postfix_log_minsize=0 I would have thought that way also, but oddly enough, it is rotating the logfiles using the settings Ralf suggested: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cw/var/postfix/log] grep postfix /cw/etc/rc.conf #-- postfix logging modifications --# postfix_log_numfiles=20 postfix_log_minsize=999G #-- postfix logging modifications --# [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cw/var/postfix/log] ls -l total 1250 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg99695 Jan 18 02:45 postfix.log -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg 1024549 Jan 18 00:18 postfix.log.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg94872 Jan 18 00:00 postfix.log.1.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg16027 Jan 18 00:00 postfix.sum -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg 4066 Jan 18 00:00 postfix.sum.0.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg 3999 Jan 17 00:00 postfix.sum.1.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg 2870 Jan 16 00:00 postfix.sum.2.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 openpkg openpkg 1116 Jan 15 00:00 postfix.sum.3.bz2 AnywayI'm happy that the logs are being rotated as I would like, so thanks for all your help. Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
Re: logging configuration
Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: Just add to your prefix/etc/rc.conf: postfix_log_numfiles=20 postfix_log_minsize= This way the logs should be rotated every night, independent of the size and the last 20 logfiles are kept. OK...very nifty, thanks!! I'm guessing then that the rc.application configurations in /etc/rc.d should be left alone, kind of like defaults folders in FreeBSD (such as /etc/defaults) and changes only made to rc.conf? Also...is there any documentation on the meaning of the different variables? Like, how would I go about finding out what the purpose of these are: postfix_log_prolog=true postfix_log_epilog=true postfix_log_complevel=9 Thanks for your help! Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
Re: logging configuration
Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: On Sat, Jan 15, 2005, F. Even wrote: Just add to your prefix/etc/rc.conf: postfix_log_numfiles=20 postfix_log_minsize= This way the logs should be rotated every night, independent of the size and the last 20 logfiles are kept. I've made these changes to my /cw/etc/rc.conf file and the daily cron job has thrown off an error: Original Message Subject: Cron [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ -f /cw/etc/rc ] /cw/etc/rc all daily Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:00:35 -0600 (CST) openpkg:rc:WARNING: /cw:postfix:%daily: failed with return code 1 openpkg:rc:NOTICE: output from stdout/stderr is following: +-- | shtool:rotate:Error: invalid argument `-d' to option -s. +-- I'm looking over the rc.postfix file, nothing is jumping out at me. /cw/etc/rc shows -d as debug in a few places I've never seen this fail before though(although I've only had postfix running in opkg for a couple days now). Any input? Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
logging configuration
Where can I find information on how to configure logging? I've taken a look through the handbook (albeit a quick look) and none of the topics jump out as related to logging, and the ones I have read give no info (rc related topics, install, files, etc.). I've finally pulled postfix into my opkg config, and I want my maillogs rotated daily and a good number of them kept around. fsl.postfix does not appear to be the file I need. rc.postfix seems to have some of the configuration I'm looking for: %config MTA_name=postfix MTA_aliases_file=/cw/etc/postfix/aliases MTA_aliases_update=cd /cw/etc/postfix /cw/sbin/postalias aliases postfix_enable=$openpkg_rc_def postfix_log_prolog=true postfix_log_epilog=true postfix_log_numfiles=10 postfix_log_minsize=1M postfix_log_complevel=9 postfix_sum_flags= ...but I'm unable to find any information on exactly what each of these variables does before I go adjusting them. Granted, I can take a guess on a few of them, but I want to know how I can have these rotated daily, @ midnightand I don't see any info that helps me configure these options. Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
openssl missing scripts?
I'm attempting to create a certificate for use with stunnelhitting the stunnel.org site and openssl.org, I find continued reference to scripts and other files that the openpkg distribution of openssl seems to be missing, one of the main ones being CA.pl. I'm having a hard enough time not being able to find any straightforward information on creating a certificate for use with stunnelbut the few things I am finding refer to scripts that are not in the OpenSSL distro that I've installed via OpenPKG. I'm just wondering if this is intentional or not...and if there is anything that can be done about it. Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
perl error in openpkg build -Ua
I'm suddenly getting a perl error executing openpkg build -Ua. I don't recall making any changes that might have caused this. I was playing w/ ImageMagick awhile back the last time I had some free time, but I only recall adding packages of all sorts, not removing any. Here is the error I'm getting: [EMAIL PROTECTED] openpkg build -Ua update.sh no element found at line 1, column 0, byte 0 at /cw/lib/perl/vendor_perl/5.8.4/i386-freebsd/XML/Parser.pm line 187 ...any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: perl error in openpkg build -Ua
F. Even wrote: I'm suddenly getting a perl error executing openpkg build -Ua. I don't recall making any changes that might have caused this. I was playing w/ ImageMagick awhile back the last time I had some free time, but I only recall adding packages of all sorts, not removing any. Here is the error I'm getting: [EMAIL PROTECTED] openpkg build -Ua update.sh no element found at line 1, column 0, byte 0 at /cw/lib/perl/vendor_perl/5.8.4/i386-freebsd/XML/Parser.pm line 187 OKI've tried it a couple more timesand now it is suddenly working. Not sure I understand why...I have not changed anything. Could the error have come if ftp.openpkg.org was unavailable to me for some odd reason? That's the only thing I can think of. Thanks! __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
imagemagick package
Is there any possibility of getting a version of the package that does not require X, or is there a way to pass the source RPM options to remove the X dependency and get it to compile with the flag not requiring X. I grabbed the source and tried to install it, but it doesn't appear to see a good portion of the stuff installed in my /cw hierarchy so it's not working right. But it did install after passing the without-x flag: * --without-x: By default, ImageMagick will use X11 libraries if they are available. When --without-x is specified, use of X11 is disabled. The display, animate, and import programs are not built or installed. The remaining programs have reduced functionality such as no access to X11 fonts (consider using Postscript or TrueType fonts instead). Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: openpkg 1.9 rpm install error
Thomas Lotterer wrote: On Mon, Jun 21, 2004, F. Even wrote: [...] what I'm asking is, can I do the following: Take openpkg-20040609-20040609.src.rpm, modify the spec file as described earlier to make this a 1.9 bootstrap. Then after converting the database, I should install the openpkg-20040609- 20040609.src.rpm again, unmodified, to bring myself from 1.3 to CURRENT. Is that correct? ... to bring myself from 1.9 to CURRENT, exactly. I don't remember all the issues why we introduced the intermediate step. But I do remeber: - OpenPKG 1.3 does not understand the %track section, it will become part of the previous %description. This is a cosmetic issue only. - OpenPKG 1.3 does not understand the Class: header and bails out on rebuilding. This is a showstopper. - The database needs conversion and it's a good idea to do the acutal install with a already converted database but database conversion requires the new rpm. - The new --tagfmt feature requires OpenPKG 2.0 but the upgrade is done using the existing (old) software. This might be a cosmetic issue if you do not use that feature but will be nasty if you use it and the bootstrap package itself receives a wrong filename. The intermediate OpenPKG 1.9 bootstrap resolves all those issues in a very elegant (although CPU time consuming ;-) way and provides a safe and compatible upgrade path. ...but that is where it crapped out on me (not very elegantly), trying to simply rpm --rebuild the source 1.9 bootstrap. So that is why I intend on trying some of these other things steps you suggested. Too late now though...bed time. Thanks for your assistance. I'll probably have a few more questions and errors to post. I've put a list of my installed pkgs, I've removed all of the perl stuff in anticipation of this upgrade (it seems like it was somewhat recommended in the upgrade docs). I'll have another go at it sometime tomorrow. Thanks. [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpm -qa | grep openpkg openpkg-1.3.1-1.3.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpm -qa | sort binutils-2.14-1.3.0 bzip2-1.0.2-1.3.0 cdk-4.9.10.20030418-1.3.0 coreutils-5.0.1-1.3.2 curl-7.10.6-1.3.0 db-4.1.25.1-1.3.0 expat-1.95.6-1.3.0 freetype-2.1.4-1.3.0 fsl-1.3.0-1.3.2 gcc-3.3-1.3.0 jpeg-6b-1.3.0 lzo-1.08-1.3.0 make-3.80-1.3.0 ncurses-5.3.20030726-1.3.0 ntp-4.1.2-1.3.1 openpkg-1.3.1-1.3.1 openssh-3.6.1p2-1.3.2 openssl-0.9.7b-1.3.2 png-1.2.5-1.3.0 procmail-3.22-1.3.0 readline-4.3-1.3.0 sudo-1.6.7p5-1.3.1 zlib-1.1.4-1.3.0 __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: updated 1.9 intermediate package for upgrade procedure 1.3 - 2.0 available (Was: Re: openpkg 1.9 rpm install error)
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004, F. Even wrote: [...] seem then that the 1.9 bootstrap would need an upgrade I created the upgrade companion packages and added them to the ftp download area ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/release/2.0/UPD/ openpkg-1.9.3-2.0.3.src.rpm openpkg-1.9.2-2.0.2.src.rpm [*] openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1.src.rpm [*] [*] belated and just for completeness See also http://cvs.openpkg.org/chngview?cn=17591 and http://cvs.openpkg.org/openpkg-re/upgrade.txt = 1.44 Thanks for pointing out. You're welcome. But, not to be bothersome, but I think I'm a little bit more confused now. What exactly needs to be done to get from OpenPKG 1.3.1 to anywhere? I think this is a little confusing: - use openpkg-1.3.1 to rebuild and install the openpkg-1.9.0-2.0.0.src.rpm provided with the 2.0 release (intentionally no src.sh available). This intermediate package is a modified openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0.src.rpm that has the offending Class: header removed. This is the recommended variant. For updated = openpkg-2.0.1-2.0.1 corresponding companion = openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1 are available. Can or should openpkg-1.9.0-2.0.0.src.rpm be used at all? Under what circumstances would openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1, openpkg-1.9.2-2.0.2.src.rpm, or openpkg-1.9.3-2.0.3.src.rpm be used? Is there any particular path in the bootstrapping I should use if I want to end up @ CURRENT? Meaning, if I manage to get to openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0 somehow, someway, can I just short-circuit the rest and install openpkg-20040609-20040609.src.rpm? Thanks for your assistance. Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: updated 1.9 intermediate package for upgrade procedure 1.3 - 2.0 available (Was: Re: openpkg 1.9 rpm install error)
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004, F. Even wrote: [...] seem then that the 1.9 bootstrap would need an upgrade I created the upgrade companion packages and added them to the ftp download area ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/release/2.0/UPD/ openpkg-1.9.3-2.0.3.src.rpm openpkg-1.9.2-2.0.2.src.rpm [*] openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1.src.rpm [*] [*] belated and just for completeness See also http://cvs.openpkg.org/chngview?cn=17591 and http://cvs.openpkg.org/openpkg-re/upgrade.txt = 1.44 Thanks for pointing out. You're welcome. But, not to be bothersome, but I think I'm a little bit more confused now. What exactly needs to be done to get from OpenPKG 1.3.1 to anywhere? I think this is a little confusing: - use openpkg-1.3.1 to rebuild and install the openpkg-1.9.0-2.0.0.src.rpm provided with the 2.0 release (intentionally no src.sh available). This intermediate package is a modified openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0.src.rpm that has the offending Class: header removed. This is the recommended variant. For updated = openpkg-2.0.1-2.0.1 corresponding companion = openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1 are available. Well, after clearing out all of the cruft in SRC and TMP, I decided to give 1.9.0-2.0.0 another whirl. Same error still. On to 1.9.1-2.0.1 I guess It dies in pretty much the same place trying to go from 1.9.1-2.0.1. I can really only think of one other thing that might be a little odd in my config, but has never caused a problem before, and that is that I have /cw symlinked: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ls -lrt | grep cw lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 13 Nov 10 2003 cw - /home/openpkg ...it is most definitely bedtime now. I couldn't sleep is the only reason I didn't leave this for tomorrow. ;-) [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpm --rebuild openpkg-1.9.1-2.0.1.src.rpm snip using piecewise archive linking... /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a file.o timeval.o base64.o hostip.o progress.o formdata.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a cookie.o http.o sendf.o ftp.o url.o dict.o if2ip.o speedcheck.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a getdate.o ldap.o ssluse.o version.o getenv.o escape.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a mprintf.o telnet.o netrc.o getinfo.o transfer.o strequal.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a easy.o security.o krb4.o memdebug.o http_chunks.o strtok.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a connect.o llist.o hash.o multi.o content_encoding.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a share.o http_digest.o md5.o http_negotiate.o http_ntlm.o : .libs/libcurl.a /cw/bin/ar cru .libs/libcurl.a inet_pton.o strtoofft.o ranlib .libs/libcurl.a creating libcurl.la (cd .libs rm -f libcurl.la ln -s ../libcurl.la libcurl.la) make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/lib' make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/lib' Making all in src make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/src' /cw/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/make-3.80/make all-am make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/src' if /cw/bin/cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I../include -I../src -I../src -I/cw/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/../zlib-1.2.1 -I/cw/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/../zlib-1.2.1 -MT main.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/main.Tpo -c -o main.o main.c; \ then mv -f .deps/main.Tpo .deps/main.Po; else rm -f .deps/main.Tpo; exit 1; fi main.c:1014:2: #error lack of strtoll() needs fixing make[2]: *** [main.o] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/src' make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/openpkg/RPM/TMP/openpkg-1.9.1/curl-7.11.0/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 + exit 2 + exit 2 error: Bad exit status from /cw/RPM/TMP/rpm-tmp.15631 (%build) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /cw/RPM/TMP/rpm-tmp.15631 (%build) __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
openpkg upgrading
I'm currently running OpenPKG 1.3. I'm in the process of upgrading my FreeBSD 4.0 box to OpenPKG 2.0. I'm noticing on the release schedule that OPKG 2.1 should be out shortly. Is there any reason, considering this, that I shouldn't just upgrade to OPKG-current? ...and if I were to do that, are there any specific processes I should follow? I'm thinking: 1. Install openpkg-1.9.0-2.0.0.src.rpm 2. Upgrade to openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0.src.rpm 3. Upgrade to openpkg-2.0.3-2.0.3.src.rpm (should I apply the 2.0.1 - 2.0.2 versions first?) 4. Upgrade installed pkgs to 2.x.x versions. 5. Install openpkg-20040609-20040609.src.rpm 6. Upgrade installed pkgs to current versions. 7. Wait for OPKG 2.1 release and upgrade to that. Is there any problems with this scenario? __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: No -devel package in OpenPKG ?
On 12/9/03 4:24 AM, Michael Schloh von Bennewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Frank, On Mon, Dec 08, 2003, F. Even wrote: I'm looking to build Apache with some of the options turned on. Do I need to specify --define on the --rebuild of the .src.rpm step, or can I specify that after the binary RPM has been built? ...or, is it when the binary RPM is built, there are no options that can be specified? After learning which options a OpenPKG source package supports (with rpm -qpi), you can use those options by specifying the options on the command line while building the source package (rpm --rebuild --define 'with_option yes' package.src.rpm). Unfortunately while installing binary packages (rpm -Uvh package.ix86.rpm), you can give all sorts of options on the command line (--define 'with_whatever yes') and rpm will silently ignore them. It's just not possible to add or remove options after a binary package is created. If you make a mistake, you'll have to build the source package again using the correct options. It's a wise thing to do to check a newly created binary package to make sure that the options you wish are really there (rpm -qpi package.ix86.rpm). It's easy to make the mistake of incorrectly specifying the option. For example, $ rpm --rebuild package.src.rpm --define 'with_x11 yes' (CORRECT!) $ rpm --rebuild package.src.rpm --define 'with_x11=yes' (WRONG!) In the second example above, the package will probably be built without X11. $ rpm -qpi package.ix86.rpm [...] Provides: package::with_x11 = =yes ...and I'm left wondering how does the .openpkg folder get created and save these build options? I do not have one, and I've installed many packages through the process of rpm --rebuild ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/release/1.3/SRC/pkg-name.src.rpm; and then rpm -Uvh/Fvh pkg-name.rpm from the /cw/RPM/PKG folder. I have the openpkg-tool installedI really have not seen any good documentation on how to use it thoughand the man page doesn't seem to really help pull it all together. Today, neither RPM, OpenPKG, nor the openpkg-tool creates the folder '.openpkg'. There are lots of plans on how to use this folder, but until now the only thing implemented is openpkg-tools' configuration through the file you mention '.openpkg/build'. If you want to have the openpkg-tool behave specially (read about -E, -H, -r from the openpkg-tool manpage) without typing these arguments every time on the command line, then write a file called 'build' like this: $ cat build #-f /home/meuser/.openpkg/00INDEX.rdf -E pgp2 autoconf -P sudo Make a new directory '.openpkg', and put the above file in there with readable permissions. Now every time you type 'openpkg index' or 'openpkg build', those arguments will be used. Regards, Michael Thanks for the response. I appreciate the clarification above, and I'll have to check out some of those .openpkg/build options. You guys have been nothing but helpful since I've started using OpenPKG. Thanks!! Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: multiple updates in UPD
On 11/18/03 3:10 AM, Thomas Lotterer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2003, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2003, F. Even wrote: I was curious, do I need to upgrade through all the patch levels, or can I just apply the latest patch-level. [...] you don't need to update through all levels, of course. You _always_ can just take the latest one, [...] The question raised is perfectly valid. Other products, especially closed source, often require users to install original plus all incremental patches or original and latest patch, cumulative patches etc. Things become more complicated when different nomenclature is used like patch kit, service pack to name a few. Some differentiate between update and upgrade. Even worse, sometimes you get new features or incompatiblities. Can be quite confusing and is a science of its own. The OpenPKG model is the easiest for the user at the price of the largest possible download size. We should metion somewhere that OpenPKG UPDates - are not patches but patched complete packages - are as compatible as possible to the original package Transforming into practice: grab the latest version, build, install (OpenPKG done) and verify everthing is working (good Admin's habit), really done. Thanks, I appreciate the info. I have been applying them step-by-step just in case...but I noticed the package sizes were close if not the same...which led me to believe that it probably was the full package. Thanks. Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
multiple updates in UPD
I was curious, do I need to upgrade through all the patch levels, or can I just apply the latest patch-level. For example: ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/release/1.3/UPD/ coreutils-5.0.1-1.3.1.src.rpm 3946 KB 10/21/03 8:16:00 AM coreutils-5.0.1-1.3.2.src.rpm 3947 KB 10/23/03 1:17:00 PM Now, if I have this installed: coreutils-5.0.1-1.3.0.src.rpm 3946 KB 8/2/03 6:02:00 AM ...can I just run coreutils-5.0.1-1.3.2.src.rpm to be up to date, or do I need to run both 1.3.1 and 1.3.2. Thanks! Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: installing sudo without installing MTA
On 11/14/03 2:07 AM, Matthias Kurz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003, F. Even wrote:
First off, I would like to say you guys have done an awesome job w/ OpenPKG.
You have saved me lots of trouble having to upgrade my FreeBSD 4.0R box that
is in a remote location. The ports collection no longer works correctly,
packages are hit and miss...but now OpenPKG to the rescue.
I was trying to install sudo and it would not install due to a generic MTA
dependency. I have one of the latest snapshots of postfix installed on this
machine from source, and do not need an MTA.
When you have to _install_ postfix, why don't you use the OpenPKG version ?
When I need to. But, I already had the latest snapshot installed before I
installed OPKG, and it is a newer version than is packaged. I'm actively
using some of the features in the newer version.
postconf | grep version
disable_mime_output_conversion = no
mail_version = 2.0.16-20031022
OPKG verion:
postfix-2.0.13-1.3.1.src.rpm
I've seen some references to creating a virtual package. I've even found
this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openpkg-usersm=105800389211960w=2
...but even with that and all of the documentation (Handbook/FAQ, etc.), the
process for creating these virtual packages is vague at best. I would be
one of the very grateful OPKG users if this could be spelled out somewhere
for someone who is not really a programmer, and can make only crude scripts.
Could someone direct me to a tutorial/quicky FAQ item, something that tells
me how to create a virtual package to meet the MTA dependency?
In the meantime, there is openpkg-import. The magic is just the
Provides: MTA. When you installed postfix in sendmail compatibility mode,
then installing openpkg-import may solve your problem (but see above).
Also.given all the documentation, I still really have no clue how to use
lsync. Is there anywhere I can get more information using htat? How does
lsync fit in the process above?
AFAIK lsync is a tool to work with packages outside the OpenPKG hierarchy.
That means files not included in the RPM database.
The idea is to have each package in its own directory tree (e.g. by installing
like configure --prefix=/usr/local/pkgs/package-name). This is how i worked
in the past.
So each package has its own subdirs
/usr/local/pkgs/package-name/bin
/lib
/share etc. etc.
And then there is another hierarchy e.g. under /usr/local where symlinks
point into the packages subdir tree
e.g. /usr/local/bin/bash- /usr/local/pkgs/bash-2.05/bin/bash and
/usr/local/man/man1/bash.1 - /usr/local/pkgs/bash-2.05/man/man1/bash.1
etc. etc.
In your $PATH you have just /usr/local/bin.
Hmmm, hard to explain. Hope you got the idea - or someone else can explain
it better. lsync creates the symlinks from /usr/local/{bin,lib,etc.etc.}
into the package dirs /usr/local/pkg/{bin,lib,etc}, when i understand
right.
I think I understand it a little better.
Thanks.
__
The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org
User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: installing sudo without installing MTA
On 11/14/03 11:02 PM, Matthias Kurz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2003, F. Even wrote: On 11/14/03 2:07 AM, Matthias Kurz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2003, F. Even wrote: First off, I would like to say you guys have done an awesome job w/ OpenPKG. You have saved me lots of trouble having to upgrade my FreeBSD 4.0R box that is in a remote location. The ports collection no longer works correctly, packages are hit and miss...but now OpenPKG to the rescue. I was trying to install sudo and it would not install due to a generic MTA dependency. I have one of the latest snapshots of postfix installed on this machine from source, and do not need an MTA. When you have to _install_ postfix, why don't you use the OpenPKG version ? When I need to. But, I already had the latest snapshot installed before I installed OPKG, and it is a newer version than is packaged. I'm actively using some of the features in the newer version. Sorry, our mails crossed :-) (mk) It happens. ;-) __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
installing sudo without installing MTA
First off, I would like to say you guys have done an awesome job w/ OpenPKG. You have saved me lots of trouble having to upgrade my FreeBSD 4.0R box that is in a remote location. The ports collection no longer works correctly, packages are hit and miss...but now OpenPKG to the rescue. I was trying to install sudo and it would not install due to a generic MTA dependency. I have one of the latest snapshots of postfix installed on this machine from source, and do not need an MTA. I've seen some references to creating a virtual package. I've even found this: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openpkg-usersm=105800389211960w=2 ...but even with that and all of the documentation (Handbook/FAQ, etc.), the process for creating these virtual packages is vague at best. I would be one of the very grateful OPKG users if this could be spelled out somewhere for someone who is not really a programmer, and can make only crude scripts. Could someone direct me to a tutorial/quicky FAQ item, something that tells me how to create a virtual package to meet the MTA dependency? Also.given all the documentation, I still really have no clue how to use lsync. Is there anywhere I can get more information using htat? How does lsync fit in the process above? I'd appreciate any help you guys could provide with these issues. Thanks, Frank __ The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
