[Server-devel] problems installing xs-activation on F12

2010-04-27 Thread Daniel Drake
http://fedora.laptop.org/xs/stable/olpc/xs-0.6/i386/xs-activation-0.2.39.g2277cdf-1.xs9.noarch.rpm Straightforward rpm -ivh of the RPM gives dependency errors. It needs: olpc-contents python = 2.5 python-json usbmount xs-tools olpc-contents and python-json easily installed by yum. xs-tools

Re: [Server-devel] problems installing xs-activation on F12

2010-04-27 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: http://fedora.laptop.org/xs/stable/olpc/xs-0.6/i386/xs-activation-0.2.39.g2277cdf-1.xs9.noarch.rpm Straightforward rpm -ivh of the RPM gives dependency errors. It needs: olpc-contents python = 2.5 python-json usbmount

Re: [Server-devel] problems installing xs-activation on F12

2010-04-27 Thread Daniel Drake
On 27 April 2010 10:34, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Does a recompile of this against a F-12 system not fix the python 2.5 - 2.6 problem? Probably yes, but not so sure I want to leave such a task in the hands of the deployment here, as this is something that will have to be

Re: [Server-devel] problems installing xs-activation on F12

2010-04-27 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: http://fedora.laptop.org/xs/stable/olpc/xs-0.6/i386/xs-activation-0.2.39.g2277cdf-1.xs9.noarch.rpm On my list for today (together with olpc-bios-crypto). A rebuild of the srpm will probably fail because in the F9 series, the

[Server-devel] olpc-bios-crypto - relative vs abs symlinks?

2010-04-27 Thread Martin Langhoff
Curious - I see in your makefile and spec fixups you've changes the obc-* symlinks from abs to relative. Is it better in some sense in the context of an RPM? (A quick check if my /usr/*bin/ on F9 build box shows a mix of abs and rel). cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org

Re: [Server-devel] olpc-bios-crypto - relative vs abs symlinks?

2010-04-27 Thread Daniel Drake
On 27 April 2010 11:44, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: Curious - I see in your makefile and spec fixups you've changes the obc-* symlinks from abs to relative. Is it better in some sense in the context of an RPM? Can't recall, but I suspect it would have been something in

Re: [Server-devel] olpc-bios-crypto - relative vs abs symlinks?

2010-04-27 Thread Daniel Drake
On 27 April 2010 11:51, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On 27 April 2010 11:44, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: Curious - I see in your makefile and spec fixups you've changes the obc-* symlinks from abs to relative. Is it better in some sense in the context of an RPM?

Re: [Server-devel] olpc-bios-crypto - relative vs abs symlinks?

2010-04-27 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: Now I recall. I was bringing it (and the spec) in line with normal packaging: Thanks for the clarification. Many Fedora pkgs have abs symlinks though. I can see why it is tricky to differentiate between the target path in

[Server-devel] problema con Instalacion XS

2010-04-27 Thread Kevin Mauricio Benavides Castro
Hola a todos he notado que en algunas computadoras de escritorio especialmente con las DELL esta vez trate de instalar el XS en una DELL y el mensaje que aparece es SELinux: Could not open police file = /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy/policy.23: No such file or directory Unable to load