On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:23:16AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Thomas Adam writes:
As I have said, if the file was created by an application, then it
clearly cannot belong to a package.
The question was about files created by the maintainer scripts.
Was it now? I don't believe so, although
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:24:45AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 01:54:41PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:49:57AM -0400, Jason Rennie wrote:
dpkg -S | --search filename-search-pattern ...
Search for a filename from
Jason Rennie wrote:
...
Geez. Try answering the question, not insulting the guy.
Don't worry - i'm used to it on this list by now... :-)
--
Paul
http://paulgear.webhop.net
--
Did you know? Email addresses can be forged easily. This message is
signed with GNU Privacy Guard
files on the fly is
broken. I much prefer this:
# to list configuration files
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ rpm -qc glibc-2.3.2-120
/etc/nscd.conf
/etc/rpc
#to find what owns a configuration file:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ rpm -qf /etc/defaultdomain
netcfg-9.0-7
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
To find what documentation
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:28:09PM +1000, Paul Gear wrote:
Is it fairly common, then, that packages only create their config files,
and don't include them in the package originally. I can see times when
Of course it is. There are *hundreds* of files
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:23:16AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Just off the top of my head I see no reason why these files could not be
included in the package empty and filled in by the scripts. This would
identify the files as belonging to the
John Hasler writes:
Just off the top of my head I see no reason why these files could not be
included in the package empty and filled in by the scripts. This would
identify the files as belonging to the package and also allow dpkg to
remove them, eliminating the need for the postrm to do so.
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 11:33:09AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:28:09PM +1000, Paul Gear wrote:
Is it fairly common, then, that packages only create their config files,
and don't include them in the package
as a good solution. It works for packages that
dpkg knows about. But then that could be said of the same for rpm -qf.
Rthoreau
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:22:16AM -0500, Rthoreau wrote:
Why just use our trusty old friend find?
Because the question is Which package was responsible for creating
this conffile? How can find answer that?
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabootu's Minister of Proofreading
I wrote:
Just off the top of my head I see no reason why these files [created by
maintainer scripts] could not be included in the package empty and filled
in by the scripts. This would identify the files as belonging to the
package and also allow dpkg to remove them, eliminating the need for
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
Actually, we have been requesting this functionality to the dpkg crew for
a while. It will arrive someday.
The idea is that we will register dynamically-created stuff with a
package in the maintainer script.
That's a good solution. It deals with the
Rthoreau writes:
Why just use our trusty old friend find? also you have locate, whereis,
and a bunch of others, I must say find can do about anything.
How do you propose to get find to tell you which files were created by a
particular package, or which package created a particular file? File
Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:24:45AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 01:54:41PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:49:57AM -0400, Jason Rennie wrote:
dpkg -S | --search filename-search-pattern ...
Martin writes:
One possibility would be that the maintainer script which creates the
file stores the filename in something like
/var/lib/dpkg/info/PACKAGE.createdfiles.
Gaak! No! The archive must _only_ be accessed via the packaging system
tools.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...and having a lot of empty files in /etc is just pointless.
Where would any empty files come from?
How should a package tell dpkg to install an empty file, if it needs
that?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt.
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:18:08PM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
Seems to me the idea of creating configuration files on the fly is
broken. I much prefer this:
Yes, so how exactly, for example, is phpmyadmin supposed to touch files,
such as httpd.conf, so that it works and is properly
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin writes:
One possibility would be that the maintainer script which creates the
file stores the filename in something like
/var/lib/dpkg/info/PACKAGE.createdfiles.
Gaak! No! The archive must _only_ be accessed via the packaging
system tools.
I
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 11:35:28AM -0500, Tim Kelley wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:18:08PM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
Seems to me the idea of creating configuration files on the fly is
broken. I much prefer this:
Yes, so how exactly, for example, is phpmyadmin supposed to touch
Tim Kelley wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:18:08PM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
Seems to me the idea of creating configuration files on the fly is
broken. I much prefer this:
Yes, so how exactly, for example, is phpmyadmin supposed to touch files,
such as httpd.conf, so that it works
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:57:42AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
1. That I want to start a daemon as soon as I've installed it
Typically I want to install at the office, configure in the field.
So download the files but don't complete the install until you're in
the field. The -d flag to
Paul E Condon wrote:
It appears that there are two distinct roles for packages with
respect to files:
1 the .deb of the package contains an initial copy of the file
2 the package programs/scripts are permitted/expected to maintain and
update the file as needed.
It is unually assumed that only one
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:06:50PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
3. That if I have KDE|GNOME|whatever DTE installed I always want to run
it when I boot.
Okay, that annoys me, too.
rcconf is quite handy. But removing the symlinks in /etc/rc?.d/* for whatever
DM is running, or editing
Thomas Adam writes:
...But removing the symlinks in /etc/rc?.d/* for whatever DM is
running...
If you remove them they will be recreated when you upgrade the package.
Sysvconfig allows you to disable stuff. Just select Enable/Disable in
the main menu and follow directions.
--
John Hasler
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 06:00:47PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...and having a lot of empty files in /etc is just pointless.
Where would any empty files come from?
How should a package tell dpkg to install an empty file, if it needs
that?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 02:41:08PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have 2 rpm packages that I want to install on a Sarge system. Can someone
give me a hint or a link as to how to do that.
Michael
Hi M,
the first rule of DEBIAN club is to use
I have 2 rpm packages that I want to install on a Sarge system. Can someone
give me a hint or a link as to how to do that.
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 14:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have 2 rpm packages that I want to install on a Sarge system. Can someone
give me a hint or a link as to how to do that.
Michael
Try alien -i filename.rpm
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have 2 rpm packages that I want to install on a Sarge system. Can someone
give me a hint or a link as to how to do that.
alien might be able to convert them to .debs for you.
pgpieaqieoalo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On August 12, 2004 02:41 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have 2 rpm packages that I want to install on a Sarge system. Can someone
give me a hint or a link as to how to do that.
Michael
You can convert them to debs using alien command and then install the debs:
apt-get install alien
alient
Dzięki. Właśnie o apt-file mi chodziło.
apt-file update
szuka plików Contents.gz, w których jest zawarty spis
plików pakietów.
Jednakże mam płytę DVD z Debian Sarge z Linux Magazine i niestety apt-file
nie znajduje tam tego pliku (Contents*), więc nie może odczytać listy plików.
Czy można
On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 01:57 +0300, Selçuk SARAÇ wrote:
Roots.gen.tr'ın A adresi 1.2.3.4
Ve roots.gen.tr'ın MX adresi 5.6.7.8
Fakat sarge üzerindeki postfix e-mail'i göndermek için 1.2.3.4'e
bağlanmaya çalışıyor...
/etc/hosts dosyanız Postfix'i yanıltıyor olmalı.
--
__
| |
|
Selamlar;
Sarge üzerinde hiç bu sorunu yaşayan var mı bilmiyorum ama garip bir
problem yaşıyorum.
Sarge default kurulumu yapıyorum, exim4'ü iptal ederek postfix default
kurulum gerçekleştiriyorum.
Deneme amaçlı bir e-mail gönderiyorum, gönderilen adres -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roots.gen.tr'ın A
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wiele razy słyszałem opinie nad wyższością
deb-ów nad rpm-ami.
A ja słyszałem rzecz wręcz naprzeciwną i to od osoby, która się z pewnością
na tym zna (Sergiusz Pawłowicz).
Wawrzek
--
Wawrzyniec NiewodniczańskiE-MAIL: niewod
Wiele razy słyszałem opinie nad wyższością
deb-ów nad rpm-ami.
Lecz RPM-y w aktualnej wersji możliwości
mają zbliżone do deb-ów. Również mogą być
aktualizowane z różnych źródeł, (np. ftp, http,
cdrom, dysk twardy), działa sprawdzanie zależności,
instalowanie zależnych pakietów...
Jest również
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:00:11 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wiele razy słyszałem opinie nad wyższością
deb-ów nad rpm-ami.
Lecz RPM-y w aktualnej wersji możliwości
mają zbliżone do deb-ów. Również mogą być
aktualizowane z różnych źródeł, (np. ftp, http,
cdrom, dysk twardy), działa
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:00:11PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wiele razy słyszałem opinie nad wyższością
deb-ów nad rpm-ami.
Tak samo jak wiele razy ja słyszałem odwrotne ;)
Lecz RPM-y w aktualnej wersji możliwości
mają zbliżone do deb-ów. Również mogą być
aktualizowane z różnych
Thus spake dircha:
# Paul Johnson wrote:
# What's wrong with, Make me a Debian package or lose a customer?
#
# I'd venture to guess:
# We're sorry, but we can not presently justify the costs of maintaining a
# Debian port. Perhaps if one of our larger customers express an interest
# in it...
Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 18 May 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
Anything proprietary is automatically a toy to me.
...which is why your opinion is utterly worthless. I'm not asking anyone
to like proprietary software or the corporate environment but at least
know your
Incoming from Paul Johnson:
dircha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Johnson wrote:
What's wrong with, Make me a Debian package or lose a customer?
I'd venture to guess:
We're sorry, but we can not presently justify the costs of maintaining
a Debian port. Perhaps if one of our larger
Paul Johnson wrote:
My understanding is this is a vocal minority decreasing in size as
more good, free software comes out.
You are thinking perhaps of of office productivity software?
Proprietary software is sort of a band-aid for a real solution, or a
toy for after work.
A toy for after
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 07:00, Paul Johnson wrote:
Wow, Ian's being rather optimistic in thinking that RPM can overcome
it's own shortcomings to stop sucking. Such as, 1) distro-dependent
RPMs, RPM isn't standardized like Deb is. 2) Naming conventions. RPM
isn't standardized. 3) Per-file
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 07:00, Paul Johnson wrote:
Dominique Dumont wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
#rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
As other people have written doing this is not a good thing. Put
yourself in the other position. I have a .deb file from Debian.
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim Connors [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Mon, 17 May 2004 22:37:44 -0700:
dircha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd venture to guess:
We're sorry, but we can not presently justify the costs of maintaining
a
on Mon, May 17, 2004 at 11:07:01AM +0200, Dominique Dumont ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
and I found that it can't find files it need in deb DB,I had been
tried to install it on debian,
#rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
the program will prompt
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Mon, 17 May 2004 22:37:44 -0700:
dircha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd venture to guess:
We're sorry, but we can not presently justify the costs of maintaining
a Debian port. Perhaps if one of our larger customers express an
interest in it...
So
On Tue, 18 May 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim Connors [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because all software sucks. And if it doesn't the hardware sucks. And
if *it* doesn't, then the firmware must surely suck.
Debian. Because software doesn't have
libncurses4.rpm.
- no libncurses4.deb is found
- some rpm database (on disk or on-line ?) is queried for the content
of libncurses4.rpm
- some rules (to be defined ...) are applied to avoid requiring
unnecessary files (like package doc ?)
- Debian database is queried for missing files, ncurses4.deb
Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wow, Ian's being rather optimistic in thinking that RPM can overcome
it's own shortcomings to stop sucking. Such as, 1) distro-dependent
RPMs, RPM isn't standardized like Deb is. 2) Naming conventions. RPM
isn't standardized. 3) Per-file dependencies
Incoming from Adam Funk:
use and produce RPMs whereas (as far as I know) only Debian uses deb
packages and people produce them specifically for Debian? (I'm not
That's arguable. There's Debian, and then there's Knoppix, Morphix,
Libranet, Lindows, ...
--
Any technology distinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
Paul Johnson wrote:
My understanding is this is a vocal minority decreasing in size as
more good, free software comes out.
You are thinking perhaps of of office productivity software?
Proprietary software is sort of a band-aid for a real solution, or
Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 07:00, Paul Johnson wrote:
Wow, Ian's being rather optimistic in thinking that RPM can overcome
it's own shortcomings to stop sucking. Such as, 1) distro-dependent
RPMs, RPM isn't standardized like Deb is. 2) Naming conventions
s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Incoming from Adam Funk:
use and produce RPMs whereas (as far as I know) only Debian uses deb
packages and people produce them specifically for Debian? (I'm not
That's arguable. There's Debian, and then there's Knoppix, Morphix,
Libranet,
On Tue, 18 May 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
Anything proprietary is automatically a toy to me.
...which is why your opinion is utterly worthless. I'm not asking anyone
to like proprietary software or the corporate environment but at least
know your enemy if nothing else.
Mindless zealotry does
On Mon, 17 May 2004, Dominique Dumont wrote:
Sure. Be if one can easily install rpm packages on a Debian system,
this would be a good message sent to the corporate world.
I don't think so. The kind of corporate type who even know there is such
a difference will understand why .debs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
and I found that it can't find files it need in deb DB,I had been
tried to install it on debian,
#rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
the program will prompt: myproduct need perl 5.6, and the bash must
be installed
As other people have written doing
Dominique Dumont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Currently there is big chicken and egg problem with Debian in the
corporate world. Corporate guys want to be able to install software
from ISV (like Oracle).
ISVs only provide their proprietary software as rpm because not many
corporation ask
Paul Johnson wrote:
Dominique Dumont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Currently there is big chicken and egg problem with Debian in the
corporate world. Corporate guys want to be able to install software
from ISV (like Oracle).
ISVs only provide their proprietary software as rpm because not
many
Dominique Dumont wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
#rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
As other people have written doing this is not a good thing. Put
yourself in the other position. I have a .deb file from Debian. I
want to install it on a RH system. Should I insist
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 04:10:39PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
Dominique Dumont wrote:
So the questions are now:
- does the Debian community want Debian to be used in corporate world
to run *proprietary* softwares ?
Personally, yes. I think many people have that ideal. It is written
software as rpm because not
many corporation ask for Debian. Corporation do not ask for Debian
because most ISVs don't provide Debian packages.
IMHO, the only way to break this circle is to provide a way to
install rpm that doesn't look like a hack.
What's wrong with, Make me a Debian package
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
Dominique Dumont wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
#rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
As other people have written doing this is not a good thing. Put
yourself in the other position. I have a .deb file from Debian. I
want
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 05:40:51PM +0800, Rick wrote:
Hello People:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install
On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 01:16:09AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 09:50:00PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
I imagine there are cases in which this approach won't work, but we
see the same thing from people everyday who are limiting themselves
to only using debian tools. Just
On Friday 14 May 2004 11:19 pm, Paul E Condon wrote:
packages because the Debian community believes its deb packaging system is
superior to the rpm system.* Debian also has a social commitment to free
* Actually, it _is_ superior, but I'm trying to be nice.
Vastly so. No need to be nice
On Saturday 15 May 2004 01:16 am, Kevin Mark wrote:
its stability it will get moved to testing. And then if all goes well,
it moves into stable. its stability and interaction with other packages
are the criteria that the debian packager of an authors work uses to
judge when it is moved to
Incoming from Silvan:
On Friday 14 May 2004 11:19 pm, Paul E Condon wrote:
packages because the Debian community believes its deb packaging system is
superior to the rpm system.* Debian also has a social commitment to free
* Actually, it _is_ superior, but I'm trying to be nice
s. keeling wrote:
Incoming from Silvan:
On Friday 14 May 2004 11:19 pm, Paul E Condon wrote:
packages because the Debian community believes its deb packaging system is
superior to the rpm system.* Debian also has a social commitment to free
* Actually, it _is_ superior, but I'm
Rick wrote:
Yes,I think so.but our procedure depend rpm format,
I think you are confusing a packaging format with your program. You
program undoubtedly depends upon shared libraries and other things.
But it is packaged into a distribution format. It can be packaged
into many different formats
Incoming from Damon L. Chesser:
There could be no World Peace while RPM exists freely and is so widely
supported by fanatical users with no regard for ease of use or superior
methods. We simply can not compromise!
Ah, geez. A day doesn't go by lately that someone isn't declaring war
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thus spake Rick:
# #rpm -ivh myproduct-xxx-xx.rpm
# the program will prompt: myproduct need perl 5.6, and the bash must be installed
# In fact,the 2 debian packages has been installed,I think rpm command will read info
from only rpm DB on debian
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 05:40:51PM +0800, Rick wrote:
Hello People:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install
Incoming from Paul E Condon:
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 05:40:51PM +0800, Rick wrote:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
Some might try
-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
Some might try to use it. Some might get it to work. Some might even like it. But
then those few will ask you to package it as a deb before they buy. The rest will
And others will use rpm for rpms and Debian tools for .debs, including
alien
Salut,
Je pense qu'avec ces deux documents là, tu ne devrais pas avoir de problèmes.
En fait, c'est assez facile de faire un paquet pour quelque chose qu'on a
écrit soit même, car la principale difficulté est de maîtriser le Makefile
pour le rendre debian compliant.
Debian Binary Package
Rick wrote:
Can I use rpm command to access deb DB?
rpm is available in the Debian package of the same name (rpm). However,
any packages you install with the rpm command will not be managed by the
Debian package management system. .deb is the native package format of a
Debian system.
You can
On Thu, 13 May 2004 00:58:58 -0500
dircha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://packages.debian.org
[2] http://apt-get.org
[3] http://www.backports.org
[4] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
[5] http://lists.debian.org
Not to forget http://mentors.debian.net
You might be able to find
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 03:32:57PM -0400, Lee Hanxue wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2004 00:58:58 -0500
dircha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://packages.debian.org
[2] http://apt-get.org
[3] http://www.backports.org
[4] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
[5] http://lists.debian.org
Bonjour la liste !
Je dois porter un bon paquet de package rpm vers du debian et je me
demande un peu comment faire.
Apres etude de la question il s'avere qu'alien correspond bien a mon
probleme mais j aimerai avoir votre avis sur la methode operatoire precise
: faut il mieux passer par des
Bonjour
Je me permets de reposter sur ce sujet qui m'interesse particulierement :
quelle est selon vous la meilleure facon de porter des rpm sous debian (en
vue d'en faire un jour eventuellement des .deb)?
Dans un premier temps je me contente de tout installer (via les src.rpm)
et pour cela
rpm sous debian (en vue d'en faire un jour eventuellement des .
deb)?
Dans un premier temps je me contente de tout installer (via les src.
rpm) et pour cela j'utilise alien -t (pour faire des tar), qu'en dites
vous ?
Sous Debian, tu as plus de 1 packages !? cela m'étonnerait
fortement
Le 13.05.2004 01:47:42, Joseph a écrit :
Bonjour
Salut,
Je me permets de reposter sur ce sujet qui m'interesse
particulierement : quelle est selon vous la meilleure facon de porter
des rpm sous debian (en vue d'en faire un jour eventuellement des .
deb)?
Dans un premier temps je me
Woody i ilk kez kurdum ve rpm paketlerini kurmaya
çalıştığımda aşağıdaki hata mesajını aldım
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - No such file or directory (2)error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm
rpm initdb ve
rpm rebuilddb
kullanmayı denedim fakat yine aynı
Debian'in standart paket sistemi deb'tir. rpm paketlerin kurulumu sorun
yaratir. illaki rpm kumak istiyorsaniz. oncelikle alien kurun:
apt-get install alien
daha sonra rpm paketinizi asagida komutla deb formatina cevirin:
alien --to-deb package.rpm
ve
dpkg -i package.deb
ama internet
alien`la deb`e cevririp bir de oyle kurmayi
dene
- Original Message -
From:
Onur BİNGÜL
To: debian-user-turkish@lists.debian.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 3:47
PM
Subject: rpm sorunu
Woody i ilk kez kurdum ve rpm
paketlerini kurmaya çalıştığımda
* Onur BİNGÜL [2004-05-12 15:47:02+0300]
Woody 'i ilk kez kurdum ve rpm paketlerini kurmaya çalıştığımda aşağıdaki
hata mesajını aldım
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - No such file or directory (2)
error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm
rpm -initdb ve
rpm
sonucta fener sampiyon olmustur. yasasin debian (biraz alakasiz oldu
ama)
On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 16:27, Recai Oktas wrote:
* Onur BİNGÜL [2004-05-12 15:47:02+0300]
Woody 'i ilk kez kurdum ve rpm paketlerini kurmaya çalıştığımda aşağıdaki
hata mesajını aldım
error: cannot open Packages
Hello People:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install these rpm packages(from redhat) On
debian,but I found
On (12/05/04 17:40), Rick wrote:
Hello People:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install these rpm packages
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 05:40:51PM +0800, Rick wrote:
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install these rpm
Thank you for your help,I should check the alien manual in detail first.
Our product is base on redhat,I will porting it to Debian,but in this
system,many procedure depend redhat rpms,for example:
glibc-2.3.2-11.9.i386.rpm, perl-5.8.0-88.i386.rpm,etc..
At the start,I wanted to try install these rpm packages(from redhat)
Once you have done
hi
I am a debian new user.I had set up Debian env,I will use rpm on it,but
when I run rpm -qa,the following error showed:
---
# rpm -qa
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - No such file or directory (2)
#
---
My Debian kernel is 2.4.18
On Monday 10 May 2004 10:01, li Rick wrote:
I am a debian new user.I had set up Debian env,I will use rpm on
it,but when I run rpm -qa,the following error showed:
If you're a new user to Debian you might like to use apt instead of RPM.
In my opinion it is a lot more flexible
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 05:01:03PM +0800, li Rick wrote:
I am a debian new user.I had set up Debian env,I will use rpm on it,but
when I run rpm -qa,the following error showed:
---
# rpm -qa
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - No such file or directory (2
Buenos días,
Sigo haciendo preguntas - más que nada para no ... - estoy intentando
instalar el JFFNMS ( Just For Fun Networks ) y uno de los requisitos es el
Mysql-server, hasta aquí bien, me he conectado a la página de mysql.com y
estoy bajandome el paquete MySQL-server-4.0.18-0.i386.rpm vuelvo
bajandome el paquete MySQL-server-4.0.18-0.i386.rpm vuelvo a decir que
de Linux se muy poco así que quizás la pregunta será muy básica, creo que
los paquetes .rpm son de Red Hat ¿no? como puedo compilar este paquete en
un Debian.
En Debian tenemos apt-get que es una maravilla.
Como root pon apt-get
conectado a la página de mysql.com y
estoy bajandome el paquete MySQL-server-4.0.18-0.i386.rpm vuelvo a decir
que de Linux se muy poco así que quizás la pregunta será muy básica, creo
que los paquetes .rpm son de Red Hat ¿no? como puedo compilar este
paquete en un Debian.
Este paquete no lo puedes
conectado a la página de mysql.com y
estoy bajandome el paquete MySQL-server-4.0.18-0.i386.rpm vuelvo a decir que
de Linux se muy poco así que quizás la pregunta será muy básica, creo que
los paquetes .rpm son de Red Hat ¿no? como puedo compilar este paquete en
un Debian.
Lo que te conviene hacer, es
* Adam Funk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040217 00:48]:
On Monday 16 February 2004 21:30, Vineet Kumar wrote:
(1)
So it doesn't matter what distribution your rpm was targetted for; in
most cases, it's not debian, and installing it on your debian system
will most likely result in a system which
401 - 500 of 1111 matches
Mail list logo
