CentOS is simply great. I use it as my main desktop. I use VMWare clients for any "special needs" software. I am struggling a bit with the plethora of repos and looking for some advice.
Would you opine with detail on the best repo setup for a desktop CentOS 5?
Comments: rpmforge provides fine rpms. kbsingh, google, adobe, kde-redhat, CentOS-Testing , CentOS-fastrack, epel, ATRPMs also provide fine RPMs. epel seems to have some stuff that I have not found on the others (like gnucash), but enabling epel worries me about conflicts with rpmforge et al. I recalling hearing about priorities and protectbase yum plugins. My thinking is someone has mastered these issues and I could copy their setup so I could do a "yum search whatever" a "yum provides whatever", "yum update", etc without having to enable/disable repos or includepkgs/exclude packages in the repo (i.e., "just work"). I realize one size won't fit all, but your recommendations/thoughts are appreciated.
On 7/18/07, John Thomas gmane-2006-04-16@jt-socal.com wrote:
Comments: rpmforge provides fine rpms. kbsingh, google, adobe, kde-redhat, CentOS-Testing , CentOS-fastrack, epel, ATRPMs also provide fine RPMs. epel seems to have some stuff that I have not found on the others (like gnucash), but enabling epel worries me about conflicts with rpmforge et al. I recalling hearing about priorities and protectbase yum plugins. My thinking is someone has mastered these issues and I could copy their setup so I could do a "yum search whatever" a "yum provides whatever", "yum update", etc without having to enable/disable repos or includepkgs/exclude packages in the repo (i.e., "just work"). I realize one size won't fit all, but your recommendations/thoughts are appreciated.
Without stepping on too many toes or getting all into the politics of the matter, EPEL has good packages, but they are unconcerned about playing nice with other repositories. The general sentiment seems to be that packagers who want their stuff distributed should simply use EPEL for distribution.
RPMForge and centos play very nicely together and the developers of both projects are in frequent contact.
Testing is just that. Don't use it if you're worried about possible breakage.
ATrpms has some hard-to-find packages, but can replace system packages which can potentially cause issues.
Basically, while it's cumbersome, using the protectbase or priorites plugins is good, and if you're concerned about a repository, you might want to limit the repositories in the .repo file to only include certain packages.
We are looking for a cache appliance OS for web content on Linux Server any advice Alex Lech Bajan RAQport Inc. 2004 North Monroe Street Arlington Virginia 22207 Washington DC Area USA TEL: 703-528-0114 TEL2: 703-652-0993 FAX: 703-940-8300 EMAIL: alex@raqport.com WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
--------------------------------- Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Thank you for your comments, Jim.
Without stepping on too many toes or getting all into the politics of the matter, EPEL has good packages, but they are unconcerned about playing nice with other repositories. The general sentiment seems to be that packagers who want their stuff distributed should simply use EPEL for distribution.
Does this make the best "protect strategy" epel before rpmforge (i.e. yum should check in epel and if it is not in there, check rpmforge)?
RPMForge and centos play very nicely together and the developers of both projects are in frequent contact.
Is RedHat in this loop? Perhaps epel is Rehat's attempt to force a bigger division between it and CentOS?
Testing is just that. Don't use it if you're worried about possible breakage. ATrpms has some hard-to-find packages, but can replace system packages which can potentially cause issues.
Thanks, does it make sense to include these, but with a low priority protection and, if so, which should be the lowest scoundrel ;)?
Basically, while it's cumbersome, using the protectbase or priorites plugins is good, and if you're concerned about a repository, you might want to limit the repositories in the .repo file to only include certain packages.
The problem I found with includepkgs is that "yum --enablerepo=* search whatever" does not find that whatever is easily installed by adding it to the includepkgs line.
In that regard, which is better, protectbase or priorities?
On 7/18/07, John Thomas gmane-2006-04-16@jt-socal.com wrote:
Thank you for your comments, Jim.
Oh if there's one thing I'll do, it's offer my opinion, whether you want it or not. :-P
Does this make the best "protect strategy" epel before rpmforge (i.e. yum should check in epel and if it is not in there, check rpmforge)?
You can do this if you'd like. I'd put rpmforge higher up, simply because it's been around for ages, and has been proven in the community.
RPMForge and centos play very nicely together and the developers of both projects are in frequent contact.
Is RedHat in this loop? Perhaps epel is Rehat's attempt to force a bigger division between it and CentOS?
Yeah, there's enough political junk in this one to make me NOT comment for once. EPEL is a good idea, but the implementation has left something to be desired.
Testing is just that. Don't use it if you're worried about possible breakage. ATrpms has some hard-to-find packages, but can replace system packages which can potentially cause issues.
Thanks, does it make sense to include these, but with a low priority protection and, if so, which should be the lowest scoundrel ;)?
I wouldn't include testing unless you need something from it, or are testing packages to help out the community.
ATrpms I tend to only use for dedicated boxes (mythtv etc) so I can't comment on mixing it with others.
In that regard, which is better, protectbase or priorities?
Priorities, though it's more cumbersome.
On 7/19/07, Ralph Angenendt ra+centos@br-online.de wrote:
Jim Perrin wrote:
ATrpms has some hard-to-find packages, but can replace system packages which can potentially cause issues.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but that's not true anymore for CentOS 5, at least for the base ATrpms repo.
And in either case, use of priorities (or protectbase) is a must, as can be seen in a case like libevent from rpmforge conflicting with base.
Akemi
John Thomas a écrit :
CentOS is simply great. I use it as my main desktop. I use VMWare clients for any "special needs" software. I am struggling a bit with the plethora of repos and looking for some advice.
I use CentOS 5.0 as "stealth" desktop system in town halls and public libraries here (South France).
I use the CentOS repos with the yum-priorities plugin, and then rpmforge. Everything that is not provided, I do either:
1) check out Fedora Core 6 SRPMs and build the binary package on my system. See the WiKi page for how to build packages as normal user.
2) And if I can't find it there (example: xmms-wma), I check out the .spec file in the freshrpms repo, download the corresponding source, and that does the job.
Cheers,
Niki Kovacs
-
Akemi Yagi -
Alex Bajan -
Jim Perrin -
John Thomas -
Niki Kovacs -
Ralph Angenendt