[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[linrad] Re: Linux distributions
- Subject: [linrad] Re: Linux distributions
- From: richard <blueyonder.co.uk; richard.bown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 06:36:58 +0000
Tarballs vs RPMs. At work I run a bunch of Redhat systems and I
frequently need to uninstall an RPM and install something from
source. This works just fine. The main thing to remember is to
remove the RPM before installing the tarball. There is nothing wrong
with keeping a system with both types of packages.
Oh I strongly, strongly, utterly, indisputedly disagree, if you remove
a RPM you break the dependencies on other packages that use the same RPM
Thanks for bring up a good point.
In my last email I was not suggesting to force the removal of a RPM and
use a source package in it's place. If you remove a RPM and there are a
lot of dependencies on that package then the system will tell you it
needs to remove all of the packages that depend on it. In that case you
need to decide if compiling all of those packages from source is worth
the change you are trying to make.
In my experience I only have one program that uses libsvga, linrad. I
only know of one other libsvga program and that is for lirc, and they
provide an X11 alternative. In my case there is no dependency so not
using the RPM is not preventing other RPMs from being used.
If you are using a lot of RPMs that depend on libsvga then it is
probably important to leave the RPM in place so you can use those packages.
I have had the same experience with postfix. I can remove the stock
postfix RPM and install the latest postfix from source and not cause
other problems on the system. I think it all depends on the dependency
of (or on) the RPM in question.
Thanks for encouraging me to be more clear on using tarballs and source
vs RPMs. I think both have value and you just need to be aware of the
implications of that choice.
I you have control over the RPM data base , you can get away with running two versions of
libs, one derived from RPM and the other from a tar ball..
But also any app using this extra lib must know not to go looking for it else where.
More and more now if you add a package you see a list of dependences longer than the Malmo Bridge
, that seem to have no association with the original app.
Its done probably to enable to help the newbie get s/w loaded.
To be honest there is nothing wrong with producing a binary for each distro , it has the big
advantage that it works, and as long as the RPM is built correctly all the dependencies can be
loaded in minutes..
And there tis an up and running linrad, or what ever.
I just had to do a complete install here due to some foul ups with the OSS drivers,
I had the system back up and fully updated in 4 hours, plus another 5 hours rebuilding 7 packages
with the authors insist on compiling from tar balls.
The stats alone say it all, 2000 packages in 4 hrs, plus 7 in an extra 5 hrs, its all the flaffing
about getting libs to satisfy the config files before compiling.
You can meet the system half way, down load the RPM as an src and pull the dependencies at the same
It's a a very emotive subject, born from those running slackware, the ex-linux druids of pain and
suffering, and those accept there is an easier way to do it.
Enuf point made
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <linrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <linrad-off@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <linrad-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <linrad-index@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Send administrative queries to <linrad-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>