Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On 11/25/2010 11:08 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Programs which have no known bugs, particularly those in > bash, perl, python, or similar, don't need to be changed. > Maybe we need a tag, similar to noarch for packages that aren't version specific. Possibly "nover," for "no version" would do the job. Put it in place of F12, or whatever, and people would stop making mountains out of molehills (or, to quote Tully, "billows in basins") because the version numbers don't match. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
Sawrub wrote:
>On 11/14/2010 03:23 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 11:33:10 +0530, Sawrub wrote:
>>
>>> Running Fedora 14 x86_64, i was trying to search for a package using
>>> YUM. The search results lists multiple versions [Fc12, Fc13, Fc14] and
>>> different arch [i686 and x86_64], of which i just need it to list
>>> against Fc14 and x86_64. Why is this so, can we prevent this or is this
>>> a bad/undesirable feature in yum.
>> Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an
>> older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name.
> That was clear that searching for a packages under the repos may list a
> package that is not of the same OS version [if its not build for that
> version] all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the
> results for a different version of OS. Since as i have read that
> installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS
> version yy' ] should not be encouraged. And since YUM is there to make
> package installation easy, practices like this should not be there there.
If the package is in the repository for the release, it is working for the new
release. You are reading something into the name which isn't there, and trying
to call it a problem. Programs which have no known bugs, particularly those in
bash, perl, python, or similar, don't need to be changed.
Oh, and bravo to those who don't change them, "creeping featurism" has turned
many useful little programs into a complex maintenance nightmare, festooned
with
garbage enhancements unrelated to the original purpose. Do we really need the
output of df in csv format (someone offered the code)?
>> With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit
>> compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository
>> for x86_64, though. Just a subset.
>>
> Yes that i know, all i wanted to say here is that is it a good practice
> to list a package of different arch when the one for the requested is
> not available under the default search. Packages of different arch
> [except noarch] should only be listed against a special YUM option [like
> --enable-different-arch] or be listed under a different head in the
> default listing [like --Different Architecture--].
Different release isn't different architecture, i686 is a subset of x86_64,
i386
a subset of i686, etc.
If this really bothers you, write a {perl,awk,bash,python,sed} script to
produce
the listing you want. By itself it might be useful.
--
Bill Davidsen
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 07:50:19 -0500, Lamar wrote: > On Sunday, November 14, 2010 06:29:21 am Sawrub wrote: > > On 11/14/2010 04:07 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:51:44 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > > >> all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the > > >> results for a different version of OS. > > > Because [hopefully] they continue to work and [hopefully] the package > > > maintainer has verified that they still work without a rebuild. > > > > > Or may be the maintainer is no longer interested in re-building. > > Then they would be in the orphans list, and they would eventually be dropped > if a new maintainer didn't step up to the plate. At least that's my reading > of the packaging guidelines; Michael is free to correct me, as he's been more > closely involved over the years. > In reality, some maintainers abandon their packages silently. Without announcing them as orphans. It needs someone else to discover the poor state a package is in, to notice that bugzilla tickets haven't been answered, and to start the non-responsive maintainer procedure according to the guidelines. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On Sunday, November 14, 2010 06:29:21 am Sawrub wrote: > On 11/14/2010 04:07 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:51:44 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > >> all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the > >> results for a different version of OS. > > Because [hopefully] they continue to work and [hopefully] the package > > maintainer has verified that they still work without a rebuild. > > > Or may be the maintainer is no longer interested in re-building. Then they would be in the orphans list, and they would eventually be dropped if a new maintainer didn't step up to the plate. At least that's my reading of the packaging guidelines; Michael is free to correct me, as he's been more closely involved over the years. If a package from, say, Red Hat Linux 5.2 (not RHEL5, but old-school RHL) were to run unmodified directly on F14 (don't know any that do, but 5.2 is the oldest dist I still have running in a production setting (not connected to the Internet!)) then why would a rebuild be needed? Ten years ago I was contracted by a company to build RPM's of PostgreSQL 7 for a number of different distributions. I was pleasantly surprised at how portable (to a degree) packages for different distribution versions were... even packages for a whole different distribution can be made portable, to a degree, as long as package names (for dependencies) are the same, and the versions are fairly close for most required packages. Essentially, I could take pains to make the dependencies as generic as possible, and I could install one distribution's package directly on another. Now, since I was being paid to do this, I did do native builds for all the supported distributions; but for testing it was fun to cross-install packages. And I know of several commercial packages that are portable in this way. VMware Workstation, when it was still distributed as RPM, was like this. CodeWeavers' CrossOver is still distributed in a distribution-independent RPM. The Fluendo DVD player, Media Center, and codec packs are distributed in distribution-independent RPM's. And there are other examples. So, as Michael said, don't read too much into dist tags; they're there only as a hint, not as a hard dependency. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 16:59:21 +0530, Sawrub wrote:
[F-14 rpms with old dist tags .fc13, .fc12]
> Or may be the maintainer is no longer interested in re-building.
True. Packages, which haven't been "touched" for many months, may be an
indication that their maintainer is missing. Even more so, if there are
open bugs and a newer upstream release.
> >> Since as i have read that
> >> installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS
> >> version yy' ] should not be encouraged.
> > Where?
> >
> It was in my early days that i got to know this probably in some list
> when i was trying to learn using yum.
Could be misinformation. ;) The .fcXX dist tag in the package release
value has never been mandatory. Packagers can still choose to not add
the corresponding %{?dist} macro to an RPM package spec file. Using
%{?dist} is not 100% safe. It is helpful with some aspects of package
maintenance, but also adds some pitfalls.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On 11/14/2010 04:07 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:51:44 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > >>> Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an >>> older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name. >> That was clear that searching for a packages under the repos may list a >> package that is not of the same OS version [if its not build for that >> version] > The dist tag in the package name isn't as important as you may think it is. > > The packages just haven't been _rebuilt_ for various reasons. First of all, > there hasn't been a mass-rebuild of _all_ packages for F-14, because no > compiler upgrade required/justified doing that. Second, the package's > build dependencies probably haven't changed either. Nowhere is written > that a package built _on_ F-12 would no longer work on F-13 or F-14. > Whether it requires a rebuild depends on several factors. Third, the > packaged software might not have seen an update by its authors either. > >> all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the >> results for a different version of OS. > Because [hopefully] they continue to work and [hopefully] the package > maintainer has verified that they still work without a rebuild. > Or may be the maintainer is no longer interested in re-building. >> Since as i have read that >> installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS >> version yy' ] should not be encouraged. > Where? > It was in my early days that i got to know this probably in some list when i was trying to learn using yum. >> And since YUM is there to make >> package installation easy, practices like this should not be there there. > Who says that? Do you get any errors when trying to install the packages? > Or when you run the software? > No, nothing like that. >>> With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit >>> compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository >>> for x86_64, though. Just a subset. >>> >> Yes that i know, all i wanted to say here is that is it a good practice >> to list a package of different arch when the one for the requested is >> not available under the default search. Packages of different arch >> [except noarch] should only be listed against a special YUM option [like >> --enable-different-arch] or be listed under a different head in the >> default listing [like --Different Architecture--]. > You can configure your Yum to exclude i686 packages, if you don't need > them for anything. Ok fine, will take a look more deeply into this. Thanks -- Saurabh Sharma Linux user number: 490644 http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/ Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:51:44 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > > Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an > > older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name. > > That was clear that searching for a packages under the repos may list a > package that is not of the same OS version [if its not build for that > version] The dist tag in the package name isn't as important as you may think it is. The packages just haven't been _rebuilt_ for various reasons. First of all, there hasn't been a mass-rebuild of _all_ packages for F-14, because no compiler upgrade required/justified doing that. Second, the package's build dependencies probably haven't changed either. Nowhere is written that a package built _on_ F-12 would no longer work on F-13 or F-14. Whether it requires a rebuild depends on several factors. Third, the packaged software might not have seen an update by its authors either. > all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the > results for a different version of OS. Because [hopefully] they continue to work and [hopefully] the package maintainer has verified that they still work without a rebuild. > Since as i have read that > installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS > version yy' ] should not be encouraged. Where? > And since YUM is there to make > package installation easy, practices like this should not be there there. Who says that? Do you get any errors when trying to install the packages? Or when you run the software? > > With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit > > compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository > > for x86_64, though. Just a subset. > > > Yes that i know, all i wanted to say here is that is it a good practice > to list a package of different arch when the one for the requested is > not available under the default search. Packages of different arch > [except noarch] should only be listed against a special YUM option [like > --enable-different-arch] or be listed under a different head in the > default listing [like --Different Architecture--]. You can configure your Yum to exclude i686 packages, if you don't need them for anything. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On 11/14/2010 03:23 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 11:33:10 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > >>Running Fedora 14 x86_64, i was trying to search for a package using >> YUM. The search results lists multiple versions [Fc12, Fc13, Fc14] and >> different arch [i686 and x86_64], of which i just need it to list >> against Fc14 and x86_64. Why is this so, can we prevent this or is this >> a bad/undesirable feature in yum. > Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an > older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name. That was clear that searching for a packages under the repos may list a package that is not of the same OS version [if its not build for that version] all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the results for a different version of OS. Since as i have read that installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS version yy' ] should not be encouraged. And since YUM is there to make package installation easy, practices like this should not be there there. > With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit > compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository > for x86_64, though. Just a subset. > Yes that i know, all i wanted to say here is that is it a good practice to list a package of different arch when the one for the requested is not available under the default search. Packages of different arch [except noarch] should only be listed against a special YUM option [like --enable-different-arch] or be listed under a different head in the default listing [like --Different Architecture--]. >> Stack trace : >> - >> [saw...@sawrub ~]$ yum list available pidgin* > That isn't a stack trace. My bad, will keep in mind -- Saurabh Sharma Linux user number: 490644 http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/ Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Yum - Different OS version and Arch
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 11:33:10 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > Running Fedora 14 x86_64, i was trying to search for a package using > YUM. The search results lists multiple versions [Fc12, Fc13, Fc14] and > different arch [i686 and x86_64], of which i just need it to list > against Fc14 and x86_64. Why is this so, can we prevent this or is this > a bad/undesirable feature in yum. Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name. With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository for x86_64, though. Just a subset. > Stack trace : > - > [saw...@sawrub ~]$ yum list available pidgin* That isn't a stack trace. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Yum - Different OS version and Arch
Running Fedora 14 x86_64, i was trying to search for a package using YUM. The search results lists multiple versions [Fc12, Fc13, Fc14] and different arch [i686 and x86_64], of which i just need it to list against Fc14 and x86_64. Why is this so, can we prevent this or is this a bad/undesirable feature in yum. Stack trace : - [saw...@sawrub ~]$ yum list available pidgin* Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit Adding en_US to language list Available Packages pidgin.x86_64 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-birthday-reminder.x86_64 1.5-2.fc14fedora pidgin-devel.i686 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-devel.x86_64 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-docs.x86_64 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-evolution.x86_64 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-gfire.x86_64 0.9.2-2.fc14 fedora pidgin-guifications.x86_64 2.16-4.fc12 fedora pidgin-latex.x86_64 1.4.2-1.fc14 updates pidgin-libnotify.x86_64 0.14-4.fc14 fedora pidgin-musictracker.x86_64 0.4.20-3.fc13 fedora pidgin-otr.x86_64 3.2.0-3.fc12 fedora pidgin-perl.x86_64 2.7.5-1.fc14 updates pidgin-privacy-please.x86_64 0.6.3-2.fc14 fedora pidgin-rhythmbox.x86_64 2.0-5.fc12fedora pidgin-sipe.x86_64 1.10.1-1.fc14 fedora [saw...@sawrub ~]$ - -- Saurabh Sharma Linux user number: 490644 http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/ Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
