Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
Hrm, a few typos. Keep in mind, I'm er, drunk :^) Mike Mike MacCana ConsultantRHCE, MCSE, MCP+I Cybersource: Providing Quality IT Professional Services for 11 Years Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web Application Development Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne. Ph : 03 9621 2377 Fax: 03 9621 2477 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > Of course, the ability of those packages to integrate with the rest of the > > system is fairly limited if they're turned into dumb archives by a program > > such as alien, which, when run on an rpm based system, will turn rpm into > > effectively dumb archives in dpkg format - having no dependency > > information whatsoever and removing the purpose of having a packaging > > system in the first place. > > LSB packages are not designed to completely integrate regardless of the > native OS packaging system. Think about it - SuSE, Mandrake, Red Hat, they > all use RPM as their package format, but their packages are all alarmingly > different. > The LSB *must* define a format for packages that work across LSB-compliant > operating environments, but it *cannot* define how they integrate. It would > be a far more intrusive standard if it attempted to do that. It would be a far more effective standard if they did that. Standard namign conventions for packages is a simple matter of p[olicy and easily decided. Choosing a standard packaging format to record this information is a logical first step to making Linux an Operating system. Not a hundred and fifty of them. > So, regardless of the native packaging format, LSB packages will islands. :) If you meant *are* islands, then yes. But that's nto a desirable situation. > Again, it is a subtle difference, but a crucial one. If you don't understand > it fully, I do. You just don't seem to be listening to what I'm saying. This isn't a matter of > try shipping a few LSB packages across LSB-compliant OSes: They > end up as useful as tarballs with metadata, which provides far less than the > full capabilities provided by RPM packages designed for a particular > platform. You'd get library dependencies, standard installation / uninstallation, file verification, upgrades, and a bunch of other stuff - excepting package dependencies which the LSB does not *yet* deal with. A good start though. What you don't understand is that I don't find the situation you've described as desirable: no system administrator would. Dependencies are part of the Linux and its both possible and reasonable for the LSB to do so. But one step at a time. > This really has nothing to do with the RPM format, the deb format, dpkg, rpm > or particular distributions. It's not a religious issue. Indeed. It is a matter of being able to package and track thousands of applications that will over time be written not for $RANDOMDISTROOFTHEMONTH but for Linux as a Real Grown Up OS - aka, the LSB. Mike -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
This one time, at band camp, Tim White wrote: >Does anyone know of any other RHN type servers for free? Mentioned elsewhere in this thread, "current", from some admins at Duke University. Google will show you the path. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
This one time, at band camp, Stewart wrote: > >On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:23 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right >>direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of apt-get/dpkg/dselect >>in both operation and configuration. > >now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please explain' exactly >what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and how they work >together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple elegance' as one >rpm one. :-) dpkg: unpacks debs on the system, keeps a track of what's installed, removes the files, maintains the installed package database (and a few more complex things like maintaining conffile integrity and diversions). apt: works out dependencies between packages, makes sure the system has all the correct packages installed, wraps around dpkg to install a package or group of packages at once. Knows where to download packages from (cdrom, ftp site, whatever) dselect: package selection frontend, lets user see what's installed on the system and allows them to choose what they want installed / uninstalled. wraps around apt which does the work of installing the packages (which in turn calls dpkg to do the work of installing the packages...) see also: aptitude >but other than that i'm pretty impressed with how my woody is >installing. Red Hat, Mandrake, Slackware, Gentoo, Debian... they're all the same in the end, but it's double entendre like this that makes Debian the best :-) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
This one time, at band camp, John Ferlito wrote: >a) register on a website to setup a "Demo" account which expires every >2 months unless I fill in a survey. Ever tried doing this if you are >managing 5+ machines. It's a bit of a pain. > >b) pay for the "luxury" of not having to do the above c) install current on one machine, mirror the packages locally and use that. I do the same (similar, anyway) for Debian with apt-proxy. Anyway, the Distro flame war is scheduled for August. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
Does anyone know of any other RHN type servers for free? current, as I mentioned earlier. -- Del -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
> Of course, the ability of those packages to integrate with the rest of the > system is fairly limited if they're turned into dumb archives by a program > such as alien, which, when run on an rpm based system, will turn rpm into > effectively dumb archives in dpkg format - having no dependency > information whatsoever and removing the purpose of having a packaging > system in the first place. LSB packages are not designed to completely integrate regardless of the native OS packaging system. Think about it - SuSE, Mandrake, Red Hat, they all use RPM as their package format, but their packages are all alarmingly different. The LSB *must* define a format for packages that work across LSB-compliant operating environments, but it *cannot* define how they integrate. It would be a far more intrusive standard if it attempted to do that. So, regardless of the native packaging format, LSB packages will islands. :) > > Subtle, but important for an accurate reading of the LSB and what it > > requires. > > Which has been done. You don't seem to be saying anything different than > what I am. RPM is not the "standard packaging format for Linux", as you stated. It is, however, the package format selected by LSB as a common distribution format for application developers targeting LSB-compliant operating environments. Again, it is a subtle difference, but a crucial one. If you don't understand it fully, try shipping a few LSB packages across LSB-compliant OSes: They end up as useful as tarballs with metadata, which provides far less than the full capabilities provided by RPM packages designed for a particular platform. This really has nothing to do with the RPM format, the deb format, dpkg, rpm or particular distributions. It's not a religious issue. - Jeff -- "...and did you know that Twisties have real cheese in them?" - Dave "I didn't even think they had real twists in them!" - Andrew -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 14:06, Brett Fenton wrote: > apt is cutting out a step. in the simplest case with an rpm you might > visit rpmfind.net for example, locate your package, download and then > install. Er, no. That's not the simplest case. up2date -i package apt is great, but as we've said before in this thread, there's many such application that work on top of rpm, including apt itself. up2date has been in Red hat for a very long time. Mike -- Mike MacCana ConsultantRHCE, MCSE, MCP+I Cybersource: Providing Quality IT Professional Services for 11 Years Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web Application Development Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne. Ph : 03 9621 2377 Fax: 03 9621 2477 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:46, Terry Collins wrote: > John Ferlito wrote: > > Yes but why would I use a system where I have to either > > > > a) register on a website to setup a "Demo" account which expires every > > 2 months unless I fill in a survey. Ever tried doing this if you are > > managing 5+ machines. It's a bit of a pain. Asides from what Terry's pointed out, you do have alternatives. You can simply point rpm -Fvh at Planetmirror, or your local mirror of another Red Hat update site. Since all the dependencies will be in the same dirs, and `-F' will only install what's needed. Or you can maintain a urpmi or apt repository, which if you're using 5 machines anyway, you'd probably already have to aid the deployment of custom packages. We've done that before at Cyber for desktops and it works very well. Mike -- Mike MacCana ConsultantRHCE, MCSE, MCP+I Cybersource: Providing Quality IT Professional Services for 11 Years Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web Application Development Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne. Ph : 03 9621 2377 Fax: 03 9621 2477 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:18, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > I find most people who bitch and moan about Red Hat (or Linux, as RPM is > > the standard packaging format for that OS). > > This is inaccurate, and you've said it before. No it is not. I think you've just chosen to interpret it inaccurately. ;) As you may have gathered, by Linux, I mean the LSB (not `random collection of software' or the Linux kernel). > To clarify, the RPM format was chosen as the standard format for LSB > packages, rather than as the "standard packaging format for Linux". The LSB > makes it very clear that a distro (or operating system - Solaris x86 could > well be LSB compliant one day) may use whatever packaging system it wants, > but to be LSB compliant, LSB packages must install and work regardless. Indeed. A distro may use whatever packaging format it wants for its own packages, but *must* be capable of installing LSB packages, which will be packaged in RPM, the version of which is determined by the latest release of the Maximum RPM book. Of course, the ability of those packages to integrate with the rest of the system is fairly limited if they're turned into dumb archives by a program such as alien, which, when run on an rpm based system, will turn rpm into effectively dumb archives in dpkg format - having no dependency information whatsoever and removing the purpose of having a packaging system in the first place. > Subtle, but important for an accurate reading of the LSB and what it > requires. Which has been done. You don't seem to be saying anything different than what I am. Mike -- Mike MacCana ConsultantRHCE, MCSE, MCP+I Cybersource: Providing Quality IT Professional Services for 11 Years Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web Application Development Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne. Ph : 03 9621 2377 Fax: 03 9621 2477 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 02:22:37PM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > Does anyone know of any other RHN type servers for free? > > Probably better to look at apt-rpm repositories, such as > freshrpms.net. The GStreamer guys distribute their own packages this > way, as do many others. In particular, there's an Australian mirror of freshrpms.net - apt.au.freshrpms.net (which is hosted by planetmirror). freshrpms distributes not only custom RPM packages not included in Red Hat, it also distributes all RPMs from the CDs, and updates. (Unfortunately, I've found that they aren't very timely with the security updates, so I've been downloading them from the http://www.redhat.com/apps/support/errata/ site (links into rhn.redhat.com, but you don't have to be registered to grab secuirty updates from the website - not sure about bugfixes) since up2date is triggereing some ongoing problem I have with lockups on this particular workstation. -Mary -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
> Does anyone know of any other RHN type servers for free? Probably better to look at apt-rpm repositories, such as freshrpms.net. The GStreamer guys distribute their own packages this way, as do many others. Not sure the RHN stuff is built to do this in such a straightforward manner. - Jeff -- "Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division." - Greg Leblanc -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
What most apt advocates usually don't mention is that up2date is similar to apt, in that you can easily type something like 'up2date ssh' and it will go and do it. Unfortunately there are not any other sources that you can use up2date from except the Red Hat Network. So even though I find up2date/RPM a fine solution and much much better than how rpm ran several releases ago, I think that apt is a better system just because you can say something like, look on my CD, then look here, then here, then here etc to get the packages from a local/fast/cheaper repository. As far as I can tell with RHN you have to use RedHat or pay for an internal rhn server. Does anyone know of any other RHN type servers for free? Tim White -Original Message- From: Brett Fenton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 2:06 PM To: Stewart; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately They are way more elegant. dpkg is what it's all built off. If you get the .deb file you can use dpkg -i just like you would on an rpm based system. apt is the obtaining of the packages from either a local source say your installation cd's or a remote source like ftp. apt is cutting out a step. in the simplest case with an rpm you might visit rpmfind.net for example, locate your package, download and then install. with apt it will find the package for you and then use dpkg to install it, so you don't need to bother with the searching and download part. Where apt really shines is when it's less simple and there are a number of dependencies for the package you want. In an RPM based system you may find them each individually, download, and install. With apt it figures it all out for you, grabs the packages it needs and installs them all to meet the dependencies. Dselect is just a graphical apt. It loads the list of packages available in the source you define, you select the ones you want and it then uses apt to get them and dpkg to install them, solving any dependicies along the way. The above is a very simplstic view they are loads of other neat things like apt-cache, graphical package managers (storm) etc etc. Brett :> -Original Message- :> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of :> Stewart :> Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2003 1:45 PM :> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :> Subject: Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately :> :> :> :> On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:23 AM, :> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :> :> > Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right :> > direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of :> apt-get/dpkg/dselect :> > in both operation and configuration. :> :> now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please :> explain' exactly :> what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and :> how they work :> together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple :> elegance' as one :> rpm one. :-) :> :> but other than that i'm pretty impressed with how my woody is :> installing. :> :> ..S. :> :> -- :> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ :> More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug :> -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug # This email has been scanned by MailMarshal, an email content filter. # -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
>> now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please explain' exactly >> what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and how they work >> together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple elegance' as one >> rpm one. :-) .deb is the standard debian package file (equiv is .rpm file) dpkg is prog to install/remove/query/etc .deb files (equiv rpm command) apt-get is handy tool that goes off and downloads/installs .debs as well as handling dependencies (ie. goes and gets and installs other .debs that are necessary, equiv would be up2date or apt-rpm) as well as millions of other things that I am sure to be unaware of. dselect is a graphical tool that presents a list of all the packages you have installed, are available to install/remove etc. You can then choose what you'd like to install, remove etc. It also handles all the dependencies etc. It's not immediately user friendly, but once you get the hang of it it is a pretty groovy tool. I've also found that dselect has resolved problems for me that I didn't know I had. For example, apt-get has told me in the past that certain packages are being held back, being a fool I had no idea why. Running dselect told me that there were certain package conflicts that resulted in the packages being held back, it found them, resolved them and all was well (I have to take some credit, I hit the enter key several times). Not sure that there is an equiv in rpm world for this. That's how I understand it anyway. Cheers...Steve. ***Confidentiality and Privilege Notice*** This email is intended only to be read or used by the addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Confidentiality and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you. Qantas Airways Limited ABN 16 009 661 901 Visit Qantas online at http://www.qantas.com.au -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
I think you are comparing them at different levels.. rpm should be compared with dpkg not with apt.. up2date, apt-rpm, urpmi should be compared with apt... I'm not saying apt isn't the best I'm just saying a like with like comparison would be better... and I think dselect should be compared with a large rubbish bin.. Dave. On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Brett Fenton wrote: > They are way more elegant. > > dpkg is what it's all built off. If you get the .deb file you can use > dpkg -i just like you would on an rpm based system. > > apt is the obtaining of the packages from either a local source say > your installation cd's or a remote source like ftp. > > apt is cutting out a step. in the simplest case with an rpm you might > visit rpmfind.net for example, locate your package, download and then > install. with apt it will find the package for you and then use dpkg > to install it, so you don't need to bother with the searching and > download part. Where apt really shines is when it's less simple and > there are a number of dependencies for the package you want. In an RPM > based system you may find them each individually, download, and > install. With apt it figures it all out for you, grabs the packages it > needs and installs them all to meet the dependencies. > > Dselect is just a graphical apt. It loads the list of packages > available in the source you define, you select the ones you want and > it then uses apt to get them and dpkg to install them, solving any > dependicies along the way. > > The above is a very simplstic view they are loads of other neat things > like apt-cache, graphical package managers (storm) etc etc. > > Brett > > :> -Original Message- > :> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > :> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > :> Stewart > :> Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2003 1:45 PM > :> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > :> Subject: Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately > :> > :> > :> > :> On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:23 AM, > :> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > :> > :> > Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right > :> > direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of > :> apt-get/dpkg/dselect > :> > in both operation and configuration. > :> > :> now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please > :> explain' exactly > :> what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and > :> how they work > :> together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple > :> elegance' as one > :> rpm one. :-) > :> > :> but other than that i'm pretty impressed with how my woody is > :> installing. > :> > :> ..S. > :> > :> -- > :> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ > :> More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug > :> > > -- David Airlie, Software Engineer http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / [EMAIL PROTECTED] pam_smb / Linux DecStation / Linux VAX / ILUG person -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:44:36PM +1100, Stewart wrote: > now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please explain' exactly > what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and how they work > together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple elegance' as one > rpm one. :-) dpkg: the program that actually installs .deb packages - unpacks them, checks that their dependencies are satisfied, checks that they don't conflict with existing packages, shows you the configuration options for that package, puts the files where they're meant to be. This is very like rpm, although there are some differences (rpm can install multiple versions of a package, rpm installs are not interactive and dpkg installs are). apt-get: a front-end to dpkg that downloads .deb files from a repository of .deb packages. By default it is set up to use a mirror of the official Debian repository. The official repostitories have an enormous number of packages, are subject to Debian policy, and have a central bug tracking system. You control repositories using the /etc/apt/sources.list file, and can add non-official ones there if you like. apt-get also downloads dependencies of the .deb file if it can find them. Except on rare occasions in unstable, the official repository will have all the .deb files you need to satisfy dependencies, unofficial repositories such as those listed at http://www.apt-get.org/ are obviously under their maintainers control). apt-get is a similar idea to Red Hat's up2date or Mandrake's urpmi, rather than being a Debian version of rpm. dpkg is "Debian's rpm". The three most common commands are "apt-get update" (downloads the newest list of all the .debs in every repository so your system knows what's available), "apt-get install PACKAGE" (installs or upgrades PACKAGE and its dependencies where necessary) and "apt-get dist-upgrade" (upgrades every existing package on your system, installing new packages to satisfy new dependencies). You can do some fancy things (called "apt pinning") that allows you to say things like "I would prefer to isntall testing packages than to install unstable packages", using the config files. Otherwise it uses the newest available version of any package. (You won't need to play around with this unless you want to do something like run an entire testing system, except with unstable's Mozilla pacakges.) dselect: I've never used it, I believe it is a curses program that you use to select packages. Like apt-get it will automatically download and install dependencies. I use "aptitude" which is a similar program. It's not really a "Linux beginners" tool, although people sort of make that mistake because curses tools are "easier" than the command line. (In fact, none of these tools are "Linux beginner" tools.) These two programs might be useful for searching for packages that you don't know the names of, but a lot of people stick to "apt-get update/install/dist-upgrade" on the command line. Tip: if you give aptitude commandline arguments, it behaves rather like apt-get, so you can type "aptitude update", "aptitude dist-upgrade" etc on the commandline. The advantage of doing this is that aptitude will install packages recommended by other packages, not just strict dependencies. -Mary -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
They are way more elegant. dpkg is what it's all built off. If you get the .deb file you can use dpkg -i just like you would on an rpm based system. apt is the obtaining of the packages from either a local source say your installation cd's or a remote source like ftp. apt is cutting out a step. in the simplest case with an rpm you might visit rpmfind.net for example, locate your package, download and then install. with apt it will find the package for you and then use dpkg to install it, so you don't need to bother with the searching and download part. Where apt really shines is when it's less simple and there are a number of dependencies for the package you want. In an RPM based system you may find them each individually, download, and install. With apt it figures it all out for you, grabs the packages it needs and installs them all to meet the dependencies. Dselect is just a graphical apt. It loads the list of packages available in the source you define, you select the ones you want and it then uses apt to get them and dpkg to install them, solving any dependicies along the way. The above is a very simplstic view they are loads of other neat things like apt-cache, graphical package managers (storm) etc etc. Brett :> -Original Message- :> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of :> Stewart :> Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2003 1:45 PM :> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :> Subject: Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately :> :> :> :> On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:23 AM, :> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :> :> > Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right :> > direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of :> apt-get/dpkg/dselect :> > in both operation and configuration. :> :> now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please :> explain' exactly :> what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and :> how they work :> together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple :> elegance' as one :> rpm one. :-) :> :> but other than that i'm pretty impressed with how my woody is :> installing. :> :> ..S. :> :> -- :> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ :> More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug :> -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:23 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of apt-get/dpkg/dselect in both operation and configuration. now i'm turning into a debhead, can someone 'please explain' exactly what the difference between apt-get/dpkg/dselect is and how they work together? to my mind three commands aint as 'simple elegance' as one rpm one. :-) but other than that i'm pretty impressed with how my woody is installing. ..S. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
John Ferlito wrote:
...snip.
> Yes but why would I use a system where I have to either
>
> a) register on a website to setup a "Demo" account which expires every
> 2 months unless I fill in a survey. Ever tried doing this if you are
> managing 5+ machines. It's a bit of a pain.
>
> b) pay for the "luxury" of not having to do the above
>
> when I could use one of the many other distibution which let me do
> something similar to the above for free.
Well, then use the other distros. Simple. You have a choice.
I've always used a demo account, no problem, except I wget off Aarnet to
the up2date directory and then run the up2date.
...snip.
> or is there another way around this silliness above and I've been
> misinformed?
You get what you pay for. Simple.
If it is worth it to you, then pay for it.
This is really borderline (I'm about to call you an cheap bastard)
stuff. If you want a service, then be prepared to pay for, otherwise
stop complaining.
It sounds just like the requests for quotes I continually used to get
from local companies and silly mangoes[1] for support services where
they wanted to pay me $15/hr for instantly running to their office to
fix up their MS based machine.
--
Terry Collins {:-)}}} email: terryc at woa.com.au www:
http://www.woa.com.au
Wombat Outdoor Adventures
"People without trees are like fish without clean water"
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
> I find most people who bitch and moan about Red Hat (or Linux, as RPM is > the standard packaging format for that OS). This is inaccurate, and you've said it before. To clarify, the RPM format was chosen as the standard format for LSB packages, rather than as the "standard packaging format for Linux". The LSB makes it very clear that a distro (or operating system - Solaris x86 could well be LSB compliant one day) may use whatever packaging system it wants, but to be LSB compliant, LSB packages must install and work regardless. Subtle, but important for an accurate reading of the LSB and what it requires. - Jeff -- "... Of course, compared with Holly Valance, who has beams of light shooting from her nipples, it all seems rather quaint now." - Rove McManus on Olivia Newton-John -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 10:31:03AM +1100, Mike MacCana wrote: > up2date -u > To update the entire system > > up2date -i (package) > To install a package, and any dependencies it requires. > > Its been this way since 6.0 Yes but why would I use a system where I have to either a) register on a website to setup a "Demo" account which expires every 2 months unless I fill in a survey. Ever tried doing this if you are managing 5+ machines. It's a bit of a pain. b) pay for the "luxury" of not having to do the above when I could use one of the many other distibution which let me do something similar to the above for free. I know there are things like apt-rpm etc but this relies on someone else creating a copy of the redhat repository which I don't like from a security standpoint. Also it might not always work. Why buy Red Hat Network Basic Services? - 24 Hour Access. Demo accounts are subject to blackouts during periods of high usage. Paid subscribers receive uninterrupted service all year. or is there another way around this silliness above and I've been misinformed? -- John http://www.inodes.org/ -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 09:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > RedHat/RPM - I used RedHat since version 4.2 through to 6.x then ditched it in > favour of Debian. RPM's methods for resolving dependency problems are less than > spectacular and sometimes impossible without "forcing". Having said that, > Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right direction, but still lacks the simple > elegance of apt-get/dpkg/dselect in both operation and configuration. I find most people who bitch and moan about Red Hat (or Linux, as RPM is the standard packaging format for that OS). a) Don't understand how to use it b) Don't understand the difference between packaging systems and indexing / downloading frontends that run on top of them. Many people (not including you specifically, just in general) complain that RPM doesn't automatically resolve dependencies. Neither does Dpkg. They both however provide indexing / downloading frontends to fetch and install packages and their dependencies as needed. You seem to be aware of Mandrake's urpmi, but not the Red Hat equivalent, that's been with us for the last three years. up2date -u To update the entire system up2date -i (package) To install a package, and any dependencies it requires. Its been this way since 6.0 Mike -- Mike MacCana ConsultantRHCE, MCSE, MCP+I Cybersource: Providing Quality IT Professional Services for 11 Years Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web Application Development Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne. Ph : 03 9621 2377 Fax: 03 9621 2477 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
> -Original Message- > From: Del [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 25 March 2003 3:45 PM > To: James Gray; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Just an observation not a criticism, but is it just me or > > have some Debian packages gone pear shaped lately?? ... > > > > ... Dead Rat/RPM is the exceptionman does that blow. > > Not a particularly helpful comment unless you're deliberately > asking for another distro flame war. > > Since I've never had a problem with the RPM system, and you > don't seem to be able to get the Debian system going properly > recently, you appear to have shot yourself in the foot anyway. > > So, on that basis, are you prepared to unequivocally withdraw > your comment? Withdraw? No, I stand by what I said; compared to Debian's package management, RedHat is certainly not outstanding. "Don't seem able to get the Debian system going properly" - that's not what I said. I believe I even posted a one-line shell script that would _fix_ the problem I'm having. For the record, my Debian (Woody) workstation is now running KDE 3.1.1 quite nicely thanks and the fix took me less than 3 minutes from start to finish. RedHat/RPM - I used RedHat since version 4.2 through to 6.x then ditched it in favour of Debian. RPM's methods for resolving dependency problems are less than spectacular and sometimes impossible without "forcing". Having said that, Mandrake's "urpmi" is a big leap in the right direction, but still lacks the simple elegance of apt-get/dpkg/dselect in both operation and configuration. I have many other reasons for using Debian on my production systems (that aren't running FreeBSD) that don't relate to the package management system. If you use an RPM-based distro and are happy, that's great, I'm hope you stay that way (happy I mean). That's one of Linux's great strengths - it's ability to meet a diverse and differing set of needs from desktop users to server-farms. But don't ask me to withdraw my comments just because you disagree or can't follow a conversation thread. My reference to RedHat as "Dead Rat" is more out of habitsearch the archives of news:alt.sysadmin.recovery for our colloquial terms for different OS'es etc. Cheers, James Disclaimer: The comments and views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
> Just an observation not a criticism, but is it just me or have some Debian > packages gone pear shaped lately?? Not hugely for me, using stable and unstable on a few archs. Unstable has warts every now and then, but nothing major. > Latest glitch was last night when I upgraded KDE to 3.1.1 on Woody. Ahr, given that woody doesn't include KDE 3.1.1, you must be using unofficial sources, which are not guaranteed to work as well as 'pure' Debian sources. They could be doing all sorts of horrific things (often, bleeding edge desktop stuff will drag in dependencies lower down, which may affect other parts of the system, unrelated to your desktop packages). > I've been using Debian for over 3 years (Linux for over 7, and other > *nix's for more than a decade) and never had these sort of packaging > problems - Dead Rat/RPM is the exceptionman does that blow. Seems to > only be a problem with back-ported packages (eg, XFree 4.2.x or KDE 3 for > Woody), but still it should "Just Work (tm)". Absolutely, packaging problems may affect unofficial sources for *any* distribution, be it RPM-based, deb-based, pkg-based, whatever. If you don't want problems, stick to the distro. Otherwise, you're left to your own devices (and the help of the unofficial package maintainers if forthcoming). - Jeff -- I don't know whose brain child it was, but it was quite an ugly child. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, Just an observation not a criticism, but is it just me or > have some Debian packages gone pear shaped lately?? ... ... Dead Rat/RPM is the exceptionman does that blow. Not a particularly helpful comment unless you're deliberately asking for another distro flame war. Since I've never had a problem with the RPM system, and you don't seem to be able to get the Debian system going properly recently, you appear to have shot yourself in the foot anyway. So, on that basis, are you prepared to unequivocally withdraw your comment? -- Del -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] apt-get weirdness lately
The backported packages are NOT officially supported in Debian, you use
them at your own risk.
Also I have two words for you "line wrapping"...
Adam.
On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 09:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just an observation not a criticism, but is it just me or have some Debian packages
> gone pear shaped lately?? Seems people (including myself) have had problems doing
> stuff like an "apt-get dist-upgrade" - even in Woody. Latest glitch was last night
> when I upgraded KDE to 3.1.1 on Woody. Sure enough I got the same thing as when I
> went from 3.1.0-0 to 3.1.0-1! No biggie, I'll just "for PACK in `dpkg -l|grep
> 3.1.0|awk '{print $2}'; do dpkg --purge --all $PACK; done" then do the "apt-get
> upgrade" again. I had to do something similar last time
>
> I've been using Debian for over 3 years (Linux for over 7, and other *nix's for more
> than a decade) and never had these sort of packaging problems - Dead Rat/RPM is the
> exceptionman does that blow. Seems to only be a problem with back-ported
> packages (eg, XFree 4.2.x or KDE 3 for Woody), but still it should "Just Work (tm)".
>
> --James
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
