Discuss June 2009

discuss@lists.centos.org

286 participants
327 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

> What was the problem with audacious again ? # yum install audacious ... Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package audacious.i386 0:1.3.2-5.el5.rf set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 for package: audacious ... --> Missing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 is needed by package audacious-1.3.2-5.el5.rf.i386 (rpmforge) ... Error: Missing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 is needed by package audacious-1.3.2-5.el5.rf.i386 (rpmforge) > We publish buildlogs. There is no reason to find it out > yourself. I also do not build from the SRPM, I build from > the SPEC file directly, so if an SRPM is published, it is > because it build fine. I also build from the SPEC + tarball. I took them from RF and... ...they don't build! When they *did* build, it was maybe 2007. Now it's 2009 and EL5.3 and... it doesn't build :-( > Oh, I agree completely. So when are you going to help us? When I'll have a better brain able of a better time management for my life :-( > If a SRPMS builds under CentOS 5.0 and it doesn't > under 5.3,then this package is broekn. > > Ok, you're making it yourself very hard now, but I > will accept scripts/tools that can verify this. > I don't think any other repository is > even doing this though. Now you're wrong. You must be wrong. Say, TUV releases EL5.3. I am *sure* they rebuild *all* the packages, not only whatever was affected on the way from 5.2->5.3. This is what *each* and every repo should be doing when EL releases a point update: to rebuild EVERYTHING, just to check it still works. See, this is why I am not a QA manager anywhere: people would commit mass suicide under my rule :-) > That's a strange position. So you complain because you see > the flaws, but you only want to help when there are no flaws > and in fact there is nothing to fix. That's malicious. OK, you're within your rights. > Wait. So you blame me for all these things that you don't > care about for your own repository ? :-) I don't say I don't care. This is my first repo ever, so it *might* be broken already. I'd say it's *likely* to be broken! Hey, I am not Dag! (The last time I checked my ID it carried a different name.) > Can you give me an example of an SRPM that doesn't build. > Because we have buildlogs of everything, so everything at > least once build. Probably, that comix thing. I only tried to build from SPEC + tarball, because these are the *real* sources, right? Then, audacious should be rebuilt to spit out those plugins too. > I don't see the point in trying to rebuild everything for > RHEL5.3, RHEL5.4. That's BECAUSE YOUR REPO SAYS "FOR EL5", AND THE CURRENT VERSION IS 5.3. You can't claim compatibility when no check is made!!! > So you are just lazy and you want me to do your dirty work, > unless it is something simple, then you do it yourself. > Regardless you prefer to complain :) *My* dirty work? (Dirty?!) > It is not. Everything that works, works. The things > that do not work, can be fixed. #define _it_works _installs_from_RPM & _runs & _rebuilds_from_SRPM & _rebuilds_from_SPEC_n_tarball > Can you please list them. I like statistics. I can't, because only a freak would try to check 7,600 packages on his own laptop! (I doubt I'd even have enough disk space.) Cheers, R-C (C'est la vie, I know./) __________________________________________________________________ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com

4 3

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

> I Can not speak for others, but the only time i have > seen Karanbir be stern with anyone is when they do > deserve it. Well, I've read him saying in various ways and on several occasions something that would equate "RTFM", only it was put in such an offensive way that even myself, as an external reader, I felt compassion for the poor user who was asking an innocent question just to be slapped over the face. > I have no idea what your deal is though with going > after anyone and everybody. Do you just love attacking > people in gerernal? Of course. I also like killing kittens and sodomizing kids. If telling to someone that there are issues with "his" repo (that was RPMforge and Dag is #1 when comes to RF) is an attack, then your world and my world are different, and *your* world is broken. Basically, I have been answered that I cannot ask for consistency for something that's free unless I help fixing the issues. Fair enough. But then, if mentioning that KB's repo for EL5 is still having *everything* in testing (the repo for EL4 is not in testing, and it even wasn't in testing a few years ago when I was using it) is still an attack... ...whereas KB's *offending* and *despising* answer (because *this* is how he usually replies!) basically says that I am an idiot who shouldn't use his repo (only that he wasn't using these exact words, so he's technically "politically correct" in the way he's telling people that they're morons that should shut the fsck up) is not an attack, huh? Well, then raise a statue to the beloved KB, because I'm gonna shut the fuck up. This is not a community, and I know of several people who use ScientificLinux not because it's better, but because on their mailing list, their developers *don't* imply that people are morons when they spit an answer to the list. But now, you're right: should I have the chance to meet KB in person, I'd punch him in the face with an infinite pleasure. R-C __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/

2 1

Re: [CentOS] Web photo gallery options
by Matt 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Sorin Srbu <sorin.srbu(a)orgfarm.uu.se>wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm looking for a web photo gallery for my personal web server at home. > Till > now I've done the galleries manually from Adobe Photoshop Elements, but I > feel that is a dead end, kinda', besides the fact that the galleries > created > are rather static. I'd like an easier way to do this, eg uploading images > in > folders directly to the gallery and it will take care of what needs to be > done automagically, like resizing etc. > > So far I've come across a project called Gallery2, that seems to do what I > want. Downside is that no rpm-packages are available with yum with this > one. > > What web photo gallery software do you guys use? > > My requirements are only that the software should be simple to install, > maintain and add more photos. I'm not a pro (a newbie more like it...) when > it comes to mysql and php, so this needs to be easy to do as well, from the > gallery standpoint. > > Thanks. > -- Try this one: Single File PHP Gallery http://sye.dk/sfpg/ Very simple. Matt

4 5

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

> A quick look at http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=centos > shows that a great majority of the packages are not even > close to being "up-to-date", and that is a good thing for > those us of who care more about stability than eyecandy. That can't be other way. For instance, you can't build GIMP 2.4 or 2.6 unless you you upgrade to a newer GTK+, which would impact on a lot of apps. OTOH, Dag is in a funny position: he's the main maintainer of RPMforge, which has 2 main issues: (1) It's broken, at least partially. Try install audacious for one. (2) It's incompatible with EPEL. Try install MPlayer and VLC with EPEL enabled. To workaround some of the issues and make CentOS 5.3 a suitable distro for my Acer laptop (except that I don't use wireless and I haven't even tried to), I've made my own repo here: http://odiecolon.lastdot.org/ Read the first-page text and rationale *very* carefully! It's therefore an ugly hack to allow: *** the use of the following packages from RPMforge: (1) gstreamer-plugins-bad gstreamer-plugins-ugly gstreamer-ffmpeg (2) mplayer mplayer-fonts mplayer-skins mplayerplug-in smplayer (3) vlc *** the regular use of EPEL for everything else; *** the use of newer packages, such as GIMP 2.3.15 as an "almost-2.4" alternative to the obsolete 2.2.12; *** the use of other (unavailable in EPEL or newer) packages, including "cosmetic mood enhancers": (i) gnome-dustwave-theme 0.1, a mix of two themes introduced with Ubuntu Jaunty: it uses Dust for Metacity, and New Wave for the GTK+ decorations. Compiz effects *must* be disabled. (ii) gtk-nimbus-theme 0.1.2, the latest default theme that comes with OpenSolaris 2009.06. As I am not even on my home continent these days and I can't fix any reported issue right now (oh well, but does Dag ever fix RPMforge?), I have not announced this repo in any public place, but it was nevertheless announced on epel-devel-list: https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2009-June/msg00103.html Be free to test and report. Thanks, R-C aka Béranger __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/

18 28

Re: [CentOS] Web photo gallery options
by John R Pierce 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

Sorin Srbu wrote: > Checked the site ou linked too, but I don't get it. Would my pics be hosted > on my own server or on jalbum.net á la Picasa? I can't tell from the tour on > the jalbum web site. > you run jalbum on the workstation that you use to process your photos (could even be a mac or windows desktop, it really doesn't matter), and it creates all the scaled images and thumbnails and html pages, and uploads them to your webserver. the overhead mentioned by others only happens *once* when you initially process or add to the album. your webserver only has to handle plain html, no php or other scripting languags, no databases.

3 2

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

> So we have centosplus and extras which are the repos with > "access denied" for packages inclusion. Dag's rpmforge > which is so huge with a lot of dependencies not suitable > for "testing/bleeding edge/alternative" packages. So > what's the suitable repo? That's why people are going to > run own repos.... :o( I do it myself. We even have centos.karan.org, with all the packages for 5 in... "testing", since 2007. Oh boy. Too many repos, working or not, with packages frozen in testing or not, and this is exactly why I needed my tiny repo to partially "fix" the RPMforge<->EPEL breakage with regards to the exact RF packages I am interested in, and also to add packages that couldn't go into EPEL (like a newer GIMP that would not require any other library update), etc. So no, I don't have a problem with Dag, as someone suggested. I only find partially-broken repos "not Zen" (bad karma, if you wish), and it's even worse when their SRPMs can't build. But I *do* have a problem with RPM Fusion and Karanbir's repo, because they keep packages in "testing" even if nothing happens (they could stay there until 2014, right?). RPMRepo is the best proof that collaboration is close to impossible. And ElRepo is the best proof that other small repos could arise, and they have a reason to exist. But all this is on the "expenses" (not pecuniary, but *nervous*) of the end user, who will get confused and who might also experience system breakage. (No, priorities don't fix everything that easily.) Cheers, R-C __________________________________________________________________ The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

5 4

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

> Where did you see the QA requirements for the packages > in c.k.o ? I didn't. But since you say that there is a reason for them to be in "testing", I then assumed the reason was "testing". But then, the activity usually called "testing" is part of a process usually called Quality Assurance. But hey, maybe I am way to stupid to match your geniality! > Also, why are you ignoring what has already > been said to you about the repo and the target > audience its aimed at ? *What* exactly has been said and by whom? I only saw you inferring what it's *not* aimed at: people who don't like things in "testing". As I said, and as everyone on this list knows: KB is not a person to talk with. Usually, KB would throw offensive assertion to people. No matter what KB would say, and no matter how important is KB to the CentOS project, a quick search through the centos ML archives would show that KB is not someone easy to deal with. Probably I should stop posting to this list. I only mentioned KB's repo in the context of packages staying in "testing" for years. R-C __________________________________________________________________ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

3 2

wan hdlc_ppp and IPv6
by Bob Beers 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

Hi list, I can successfully build the driver modules; hdlc, dlci, syncppp, and lmc from the 2.6.18-128.1.14 kernel source rpm, and have managed to create a 'wan kmod' rpm. It all works fine for IPv4, but now I need IPv6 for ppp connections, which doesn't work for me. I think I'll need to back port Krzysztof Halasa's 'ppp for generic hdlc' patches to the 2.6.18-128.1.14.el5 kernel sources. Has anyone worked on this? I have tried simply overwriting the drivers/net/wan directory with corresponding directory from more recent (2.6.25.20, 2.6.30) vanilla kernel source, but I get errors: CC [M] drivers/net/wan/hdlc.o drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:39:31: error: net/net_namespace.h: No such file or directory drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c: In function ‘hdlc_rcv’: drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:69: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:71: error: ‘struct net_device’ has no member named ‘nd_net’ drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:71: error: ‘init_net’ undeclared (first use in this function) drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:71: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:71: error: for each function it appears in.) drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:76: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:77: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c: In function ‘hdlc_proto_start’: drivers/net/wan/hdlc.c:85: error: invalid type argument of ‘->’ ... and so on. Where is the best starting point for getting these changes back-ported. I guess I need post-'ppp for generic hdlc' but pre-'net-namespace'. Is this possible? Thanks for any help/advice. -- -Bob

2 2

CentOS 5.3 / OpenLDAP / back_perl
by Tim Gustafson 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

Hi, I was wondering if there is any momentum to get OpenLDAP's back_perl feature installed into the CentOS Yum repository. If this isn't the right mailing list for such a request, could someone point me in the correct direction? Thanks! Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz tjg(a)soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
by Radu-Cristian FOTESCU 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

> yes, perhaps the english language is alien to you - the > word 'testing' means something, there is a reason why > those packages are there in 'testing' - people who > dont know what they are doing are recommended to > NOT use them. Karanbir, I've always 'appreciated' you being such a 'nice' person and giving so 'detailed insights' on this list, that I'm so tempted to give a politically-incorrect reply... Otherwise, I am using CentOS *despite* you being a member of the team. (Not that anyone would care.) OTOH, it's such an accomplishment to have *all* the packages in "testing" since 2007 and none of them passing the QA requirements... R-C __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss June 2009