I use the RH3 amanda rpms on TSL-2.2 worked great...
until redhat updated the amanda rpm...
after that I downloaded the amanda.src rpm did a
rpmrebuild installed the rpms it builds worked great.
Larry
Christian Haugan Toldnes wrote:
> infernus wrote:
>
>>I know, originally, TSL was based on Redhat (version 6.x, I believe).
>>Which distribution does it most closely resemble now? I am confused
>>as to which RPM to download at sites which list RPMs for Fedora Core
>>5 all the way down to Redhat 9 and would like to know which would be
>>best. Also, I use bastille so I want to know which version of Redhat
>>is closest so I can apply that configuration. Thanks.
>
>
> I know what you are asking, but even though TSL 1.01 resembled a couple
> of versions of redhat, TSL has changed a lot from RH after that, both
> regarding what libraries is included, how they are compiled, and also
> file and directory placement.
>
> The thing is that any given version of TSL does NOT resemble any
> specific version of RH, nor Fedora. Let me give an example:
>
> In TSL 3.0 you have a library called libfoo version 1.2.3, which is also
> found in, say, fedora core 3, same version.
>
> In TSL 3.0 you also have have a library called libbar version 3.2.1,
> which is also found in, say, fedora core 5, while fedora core 3 has
> version 2.1.0.
>
> So if your package is linked with libfoo, you should select the one from
> FC3 when installing on TSL. And while it's possible that will work, you
> have no guarantees. :)
>
> However, if your package is linked with libbar, you should select the
> one linked to version 3.2.1, which is originally built for FC5. Still no
> guarantees.
>
> And if your package is linked with both libfoo and libbar, then you're
> screwed unless you find a FC version that uses the same versions of both
> libraries as TSL 3.0
>
> The point is that there is no single version of FC or RH or any other
> distribution that exactly matches TSL 3.0 on library versions,
> compilation or file placement. You just need to download some and try
> them. Different versions of FC fit better with different software.
>
> Bastille configuration files must also be tuned a bit. I don't know of
> any FC version that looks like TSL on file placement either, so you just
> have to take one and do all the changes manually.
>
>
> c
>
_______________________________________________
tsl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss
