Thomas Backlund wrote:
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>the name "urpmi" does sound stupid, like somebody belching. why do linux
>> programmers give
>>their software such silly names? guess they dont have sales or packaging
>> departments
>
>
> IMHO it could be:
>
> urpmi - Unified RPM Insta
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> the name "urpmi" does sound stupid, like somebody belching. why do linux
programmers give
> their software such silly names? guess they dont have sales or packaging
departments
>
IMHO it could be:
urpmi - Unified RPM Installer
urpme - Unified RPM Eraser
urpmf - Uni
On Thursday 09 January 2003 03:19 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> the name "urpmi" does sound stupid, like somebody belching. why do linux
> programmers give their software such silly names? guess they dont have
> sales or packaging departments
OK, how about `RPMmy' the handy RPM wizard, requires
the name "urpmi" does sound stupid, like somebody belching. why do linux programmers
give
their software such silly names? guess they dont have sales or packaging departments
Quoting Jay DeKing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wednesday 08 January 2003 06:53 pm, Bryan Whitehead honored me with this
On Wednesday 08 January 2003 06:53 pm, Bryan Whitehead honored me with this
communique:
> Steve Fox wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 12:32, Bryan Whitehead wrote:
> >>In the real world, sysadmins just find a solution (like redoing the crap
> >>ass RPM someone made) and move on with life. If you do
Steve Fox wrote:
On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 12:32, Bryan Whitehead wrote:
In the real world, sysadmins just find a solution (like redoing the crap
ass RPM someone made) and move on with life. If you don't like
dependancy checking, then don't use urpmi. Use the plain rpm command.
Write your own scr
Bryan Whitehead wrote:
> Steve Fox wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 23:19, Vox wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I actually like to think that urpmi getting old unresolved deps
>>> flagged is A Good Thing(tm). If you don't care for deps, don't use a
>>> package *manager*.
>>
>>
>>
>> I totally appreciate that
On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 12:32, Bryan Whitehead wrote:
> In the real world, sysadmins just find a solution (like redoing the crap
> ass RPM someone made) and move on with life. If you don't like
> dependancy checking, then don't use urpmi. Use the plain rpm command.
> Write your own scripts as a wr
Steve Fox wrote:
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 23:19, Vox wrote:
I actually like to think that urpmi getting old unresolved deps
flagged is A Good Thing(tm). If you don't care for deps, don't use a
package *manager*.
I totally appreciate that for packages which are being
upgraded/installed. But f
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 01:35, Vox wrote:
> Then use the ugly little hack to go around their ugly little hack,
> and keep yelling at them...if it's closed source stuff, I bet you
> are paying them...so...yell at them a lot...if they don't want to
> fix it, yell at their boss or at their boss
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 04:18, François Pons wrote:
> Ok, I hope I will not hurt sensibility but urpmi doesn't care if
> unrelated dependencies are unresolved. *BUT* urpmi when resolving
> related dependencies (and related should be understanded in the very
> large part) it may add unresolved depend
Emmanuel Blindauer wrote:
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 14:32, Olivier Thauvin a écrit :
Yes:
I'll go on the very beautifull and powerfull http://plf.zarb.org/~nanardon,
I choose an adress beginning by rsync://
I follow instruction and here an exemple:
urpmi.addmedia main
rsync://ftp.uninett.no::Mand
Le mar 07/01/2003 à 04:43, Mark Scott a écrit :
> Does putting the rpm name in /etc/urpmi/skip.list stop the attempted
> removal? It stops upgrading to packages (such as ignore apache2, I want
> to stick with apache thanks).
Do you have a specific reason to stay with Apache 1.3?
The 1.3 series
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 14:32, Olivier Thauvin a écrit :
> Yes:
> I'll go on the very beautifull and powerfull http://plf.zarb.org/~nanardon,
> I choose an adress beginning by rsync://
> I follow instruction and here an exemple:
>
> urpmi.addmedia main
> rsync://ftp.uninett.no::Mandrake/Mandrake-de
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 13:02, Emmanuel Blindauer a écrit :
> Can you explain a little more, how you can use rsync with urpmi ?
> these is nothing in the man or --help
>
> Emmanuel
Yes:
I'll go on the very beautifull and powerfull http://plf.zarb.org/~nanardon,
I choose an adress beginning by rsy
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 02:35, Olivier Thauvin a écrit :
> Why urpmi should and could do , ftp and http doesn't support this kind of
> feature.
> Maybe you can use a protocol which support... hum, let me purpose, hum...
> no...
> Ah yes ! Use rsync !! I reduce a lot my bandwith I switched from ftp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Vox wrote:
> This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> becomes daring and writes:
>>But in the Real World (tm), there are idiots who package things to fit
>>in their little world. They won't listen to me when I say to use a
>>"Requires: java" instead
Le mar 07/01/2003 à 05:22, Steve Fox a écrit :
> I would much prefer to see the tool remain smart. Really, why should it
> even care if unrelated dependencies are unresolved? It's kind of like
> getting into other people's business even though they didn't ask you to.
> (ok, maybe that's not the be
Quel Qun wrote:
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 21:19, Vox wrote:
This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
I would much prefer to see the tool remain smart. Really, why should it
even care if unrelated dependencies are unresolved? It's kind of like
getting into other people's b
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 21:19, Vox wrote:
> This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> becomes daring and writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:47, Vox wrote:
> >
> >> Easy to fix:
> >>
> >> rpm -e --justdb SuperFoo
> >
> > While that is certainly a solution, it seems like an awful nasty hack
This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 23:19, Vox wrote:
>
>> I actually like to think that urpmi getting old unresolved deps
>> flagged is A Good Thing(tm). If you don't care for deps, don't use a
>> package *manager*.
>
> I totally appr
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 23:19, Vox wrote:
> I actually like to think that urpmi getting old unresolved deps
> flagged is A Good Thing(tm). If you don't care for deps, don't use a
> package *manager*.
I totally appreciate that for packages which are being
upgraded/installed. But for stuff that
This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:47, Vox wrote:
>
>> Easy to fix:
>>
>> rpm -e --justdb SuperFoo
>
> While that is certainly a solution, it seems like an awful nasty hack.
> (but thanks for the tip :)
>
> I would much prefer to s
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:47, Vox wrote:
> Easy to fix:
>
> rpm -e --justdb SuperFoo
While that is certainly a solution, it seems like an awful nasty hack.
(but thanks for the tip :)
I would much prefer to see the tool remain smart. Really, why should it
even care if unrelated dependencies
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:47, Vox wrote:
> Easy to fix:
>
> rpm -e --justdb SuperFoo
>
> That'll delete SuperFoo from your rpm database without deleting the
> actual files. That way your deps will work nicely and you have your
> package installed.
I would add "--notriggers --noscripts"
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 02:32, vous avez écrit :
> On Tuesday 07 January 2003 09:35 am, Olivier Thauvin wrote:
> > Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 00:42, Leon Brooks a écrit :
> >> On Tuesday 07 January 2003 05:06 am, Steve Fox wrote:
> >>> Previously I have bragged to Debian users that urpmi is smarter be
Damn people on this list rock...I have never even heard of that command!!
Cool, thanks (and I didn't even need it!!).
Regards,
Jason
*sitting in awe at his ignorance of so many things Linux.
Vox wrote:
This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
I no
This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
> I noticed that urpmi now tries to figure out all the unresolved
> dependencies on your system just like how apt does. I think this is
> extremely annoying behavior and I wish I was disabled by default.
>
> Justification:
>
> I
Le Mardi 7 Janvier 2003 00:42, Leon Brooks a écrit :
> On Tuesday 07 January 2003 05:06 am, Steve Fox wrote:
> > Previously I have bragged to Debian users that urpmi is smarter because
> > it only concerns itself with the packages that are being
> > installed/upgraded.
>
> I'd like to be able to br
On Tuesday 07 January 2003 05:06 am, Steve Fox wrote:
> Previously I have bragged to Debian users that urpmi is smarter because
> it only concerns itself with the packages that are being
> installed/upgraded.
I'd like to be able to brag that it doesn't download a couple of megabytes
before consid
On Monday 06 January 2003 22:06, Steve Fox wrote:
> I noticed that urpmi now tries to figure out all the unresolved
> dependencies on your system just like how apt does. I think this is
> extremely annoying behavior and I wish I was disabled by default.
I had not noticed it is doing that now, but i
I noticed that urpmi now tries to figure out all the unresolved
dependencies on your system just like how apt does. I think this is
extremely annoying behavior and I wish I was disabled by default.
Justification:
I have an application, SuperFoo, installed. It has a dependency on IBM's
Java Runti
32 matches
Mail list logo