I know I might [now] get slammed for not using yum [yet], and maybe
I'll be promoting it soon, but I'm still enjoying apt-get (apt-rpm) on
redhat... there's a nice apt GUI tool call synaptic, which I'm sure some
debian users know. It's real nice = )
regards,
Ben
PS - does anyone have some
Ben Barrett wrote:
I know I might [now] get slammed for not using yum [yet], and maybe
I'll be promoting it soon, but I'm still enjoying apt-get (apt-rpm) on
redhat... there's a nice apt GUI tool call synaptic, which I'm sure some
debian users know. It's real nice = )
I'm not getting warm
Best RedHat yet.,.. unfortunately (since they're giving up on us in
favor of corporate entities). I wanted to say, Worst... episode...
ever! but that is just a fun Simpson's reference.
Here's an idea, one could possibly say it tests a certain aspect of
robustness within an OS: attempt to do
I've nearly derailed in the past, by such proliferation, but only when I
tried to use both Ximian's tree and Apt-rpm's... I had to choose one or
the other to get my main system updates, primarily because Ximian does
indeed release their own package tree -- in my case, most of my Gnome
binaries got
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 10:53:55AM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
I'm not getting warm fuzzies about the proliferation of package
managers that TDFKAR (The Distribution Formerly Known As RedHat) is
using. Package management and version synchronization is hard enough
without introducing three
Don't worry. I'm not defecting. This episode just confirmed for me that Slackware
is still the best distribution for servers out there. This stupid Redhat glibc
snafoo that sent me out there doesn't happen with Slack. I'v updated a few Slack
8.0 to 9.1 without this kind of issue. Yes. The
Traitor! hehe... just teasing... so... how is redhat 9? would you use it on
your computer?
Jamie
On Saturday 15 November 2003 11:07 pm, Bob Crandell wrote:
: Hi,
:
: Just thought I'd let you know, at least the ones who care (if there are
: any), that reinstalling Redhat on a clean system went
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 06:15:56AM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
I know. I'm bad.
Just let this be a leason to you. Don't cut corners.
The longer I think about the more I'm hoping Cory isn't right about sick hardware.
I'll know in the morning.
uh! I can't believe you did that. However it
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:59:47PM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
Hi,
When I type rpm -i wu-ftpd-2.6.2-12.i386.rpm on a brand new Redhat 9.0 box
I get
rpm: relocation error: rpm: undefined symbol: poptAliasOptions
This is an upgrade from mandrake 7.2 that didn't go well.
Wait, an upgrade from
Hmm, maybe see if you're trying to upgrade an existing package, (by
doing something like 'rpm -qa|grep ftpd') and if so, use the -U option
for rpm instead of -i. AFAIK, -U can be used even for installs of new
packages, so (if that's right) it could/should be used instead of -i
anytime. I use
But -- they *HAD* to do it. It was the only way. It also made them
that much cooler, er more badass. The main ill effect I recall was the
destruction of the fine chandelier in the ballroom (their first major
encounter) -- didn't they also need to cross the streams to toast the
Stay-Puft man?
Ok brand new a bad choice of words. Redhat is brand new. The box isn't. This is
a file server in another city too far from here. I had to install Redhat 3 times to
get it to work. The users were hanging over me, Is it done yet? And this was on
a Saturday after I'd given them a weeks notice
On Wednesday 12 November 2003 12:59, Bob Crandell wrote:
When I type rpm -i wu-ftpd-2.6.2-12.i386.rpm on a brand new
Redhat 9.0 box I get
rpm: relocation error: rpm: undefined symbol: poptAliasOptions
Well, first of all I wouldn't use wu_ftpd. Redhat has (finally!)
switched to vsftpd, which
Ben Barrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hmm, maybe see if you're trying to upgrade an existing package, (by
doing something like 'rpm -qa|grep ftpd') and if so, use the -U option
for rpm instead of -i. AFAIK, -U can be used even for installs of new
packages, so (if that's right) it could/should
Can you post an ls -l of /var/lib/rpm/
Garl
-Original Message-
From: Bob Crandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 3:18 PM
To: The Eugene Unix and GNU/Linux User Group's mail list
Subject: Re: [eug-lug]RPM woes
Ben Barrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:37:17PM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
Ok brand new a bad choice of words. Redhat is brand new. The box
isn't.
What I was getting at was did you install redhat over the top of
mandrake or did you wipe it? They way you said it sounded like the
former.
This is a file
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:34:18AM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
Not any more. ls now says:
ls: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: version `GLIBC_2.3' not found (required by
/lib/tls/libc.so.6)
ls: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: version `GLIBC_PRIVATE' not found (required by
/lib/tls/libc.so.6)
Have I ever mentioned
I'm not convinced it's hardware. There weren't any symptons before I started and
this last bit was because I was trying to fix rpm's dependancies.
Thanks.
Cory Petkovsek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:37:17PM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
Ok brand new a bad choice of
: [eug-lug]RPM woes
I'm not convinced it's hardware. There weren't any symptons
before I started and
this last bit was because I was trying to fix rpm's dependancies.
Thanks.
Cory Petkovsek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:37:17PM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
Ok
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:18:12AM +, Bob Crandell wrote:
I'm not convinced it's hardware. There weren't any symptons before I
started and
this last bit was because I was trying to fix rpm's dependancies.
Thanks.
No symptoms? 3 installs to get it to work?
Did those dependencies
Grigsby, Garl wrote:
What it sounded like to me was a out of date rpm database. Mandrake
7.2 used RPM v3.somthingorotherithinkitwas.0.5 (another indian
name), while Redhat 9 used 4.2. If you did do an upgrade from
Mandrake to Redhat (you are braver than I) then it is probably an
issue of an
I know. I'm bad.
Just let this be a leason to you. Don't cut corners.
The longer I think about the more I'm hoping Cory isn't right about sick hardware.
I'll know in the morning.
Thanks
Bob Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Grigsby, Garl wrote:
What it sounded like to me was a out of date
22 matches
Mail list logo
