On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:16:07AM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 11:32:47PM +0300, Micha Feigin wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 06:47:22PM +0300, Oron Peled wrote: > > > On Tuesday 29 June 2004 17:30, Micha Feigin wrote: > > > > I was just asked to install apache, ssh etc. on a red-hat 6.2 system. I > > > > > > I guess you mean a *new* version of apache, ssh etc. Otherwise you could > > > simply install the original RH-6.2 RPMS. > > > > > > > If I could find them it would help ;-) I managed to find a cd lying > > around but there is no ssh or apache on it. Couldn't find a version for > > anything earlier then 7.2 on the net. > > ftp.redhat.com is known to carry all production versions of RH, > beginning with 1.0(?) at > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/1.0/en/os/i386 > > What you need is either > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/6.2/en/iso/i386/ or > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/6.2/en/os/i386/ > >
Thanks, I had a look and thats a copy of the installation cd, I got my hands on one of those thanks to the system in tau. No openssh. compiling it requires ssl which is missing also and don't remember what else, but the list just seems to keep growing whenever I get another dependency. > > > > > Anyway, is it possible to upgrade it in place to red-hat 7/9/fc or to debian > > > > > > In place upgrade across several versions (e.g: RH-6.2 -> RH-8) is pretty > > > hopless. More so across distros. > > > > > > > I will do it across distros only if I need to do a clean install to > > save me the time of learning a new one. I guess that a clean install > > would be the smartest choice here. > > > > I am looking for the path of least resistance here, its not a job, just > > something I know how to do. > > It seems that upgrading would cause more problems than re-installation. > I wouldn't do it unless it were my own system and I had some extra time > for it. Reading all the emails (and attempting to compile some things I need on that system) have led me to that conclusion by now. Guess I will go with reinstall, just need to decide between fedora core 2 and debian (probably testing but not sure yet). > > > > > > > or should I just make a clean install over it > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > What you need to check is if they have important data or local applications > > > and evaluate them before moving (on a modern Linux of your choice). > > > E.g: do they have web-apps on the old apache version and would they run > > > with the new one (mod_perl, php versions etc.). > > > > > > > There is a cgi (written in perl) from around 99 they want to use, I am > > not sure about the various dependencies, but does use perl 5 so I hope > > 5.8 will work just as well. Its supposed to handle paper submissions for > > a conference. I guess if there is another solution that works they will > > be ok with it since I don't think much work was done apart then > > downloading the code. > > In the worst case build perl 5.005 from source and install it on > /usr/local/ as perl.5005 > Thanks, thats an option if I need it, although if I go with debian they still keep perl.5005 packaged even in testing/unstable. > > > > I know it does need msql but they said they have a version that came > > msql or mysql? Not sure actually, databases are not my thing. I guess I will find out when I have to install it ;-) > > > with the code though. > > > > Search the archive for a thread about partitioning practices (~1 month > > > ago?) > > > > I guess I am rather locked into the partition scheme if I don't want to > > kill /home ;-) > > Not if you reinstall . You can easily move the files from /boot to the > root partition and kill the /boot partition without even shutting down > the system. Growing root to instclude the extra 1.5 GB would require a > boot to a different root filesystem. However converting it to var would > only require 'telinit 1' > I am planning on uniting root and /boot, /boot doesn't need 1.5GB. There are probably points against it, but I don't see a reason to separate root and boot on systems which support it. I am mostly debating about /home. > But you're going to re-install it anyway, so you could use that > opurtunity to reshape / , /boot and the swap partition to your liking. > (See that thread about partitioning for advices regarding your liking). > I tend not to use too many partitions on systems without too many users, especially if they have only one not that large a disk. A simple setup in such cases is somewhat easier to handle. I am aware of most of the points for/against several partitions, but will have another look at the thread (I think I already read it but my memory these days). > -- > Tzafrir Cohen +---------------------------+ > http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---------------------------+ > > ================================================================= > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System > at the Tel-Aviv University CC. > ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
