I have the yarrow's iso files on my HD in a RH9 system. Let's say I want
to upgrade selected packages using an "apt-get install" pointing to my
iso-mounted files, how do I do it?
i.e I mount the iso into some /mnt/yarrow1, /mnt/yarrow 2 etc..
Then what is the complete procedure to make my apt look into my own HD to
upgrade packages. Can anybody redirect me to the correct
resource or some literature hanging on the web? Thanks.
Assume also that I do not wish to burn CDs! I do not want to use
With kind regards,
Singapore Synchrotron Light Source (SSLS)
5 Research Link,
Email: slsbdfc at nus dot edu dot sg \or\
didierbe at sps dot nus dot edu dot sg
I don't know the right way to fix this, but something is definitely broken;
and something needs to be fixed, one way or the other. The question is what
exactly needs to be fixed.
Consider something like this:
AC_TRY_LINK_FUNC(res_query, AC_MSG_RESULT(yes), AC_MSG_RESULT(no))
Here's what happens on x86_64:
gcc -o conftest -g -O2 -Wall -I.. -I./.. conftest.c -lresolv >&5
/tmp/ccW7EeDX.o(.text+0x7): In function `main':
/home/mrsam/src/courier/authlib/configure:5160: undefined reference to
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
configure:5147: $? = 1
configure: failed program was:
[ blah blah blah ]
| /* We use char because int might match the return type of a gcc2
| builtin and then its argument prototype would still apply. */
| char res_query ();
| main ()
| res_query ();
| return 0;
The same exact test on FC1 x86 will work.
The reason appears to be that you have to #include <resolv.conf> on x86_64
in order to succesfully pull res_query() out of libresolv.so. You don't
need to do this on x86, and the test program generated by AC_TRY_LINK_FUNC
does not include any headers, but uses a manual prototype.
So, what now?
Before I start digging in the up2date code myself, maybe someone
can comment on this:
I have a problem when using up2date up2date with my self-created
APT repositories. When updating, it complains about conflicting
files: it just thinks that a long list of directories that are
shared among packages conflict with each other.
Apt-get itself (and synaptic) seems to work fine with the same
repository, only with up2date there is a problem. Also, up2date
with a yum repository of then same package set works fine, as
does yum itself.
FWIW: I generate my APT repositories with --flat --bloat.
-- Jos Vos <jos(a)xos.nl>
-- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364
-- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
If I remember Tim Waugh did an rpm for this.
Tim, do you have an updated one or should I take your src.rpm and update it?
T +44 (0) 1224 587369
M +44 (0) 7930 323266
F +44 (0) 1224 742001
Open Source. Open Solutions.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Recently the version of libgcrypt was increased to 1.1.94 as a result of
this newpg would not build against the newer libgcrypt i sent an email to
gcrypt-devel list and this is what i got back
Don't build newpg at all. It has been superseded by gnupg-1.9.x .
You would need an old libgcrypt < 1.1.42 to build it. The configure
sscript was not able to detect newer versions with a changed API.
we have a problem here seems we no longer need newpg but we need things it
provides for gpgme gpgme03 cryptplug gpa kgpg (which doesnt complain so
much just says its not there) to get these things it provides we need to
go to the newer gnupg or we need to revert back to the older libgcrypt.
being so late in the cycle i dont know which would be best. so i thought id
ask before filling a bug against something. it does need to be fixed before
final is out as people will complain if they cant decrypt email in kmail or
mutt gpa doesnt work etc. i think we should probably go back to the old
version of libgcrypt
Just a note that gqview just got removed from rawhide. It has the same
mission statement as gthumb and uses raster code internally. Yes, I
know there are people who use it still. I suggest this can move over to
Fedora Extras if people really want it.
There is a new kernel config option CLS_U32_PERF that, when set,
requires a new version of the iproute utils to be able to set traffic
filters. Either this options needs to be remove from the kernel or the
iproute utils need to be upgraded.
I commented on this in bugzilla #129185 (jar(a)pcuf.fi had already opened
a ticket against iproute).
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
Probably a stupid question, but where should I report a missing component
in bugzilla? Against what? I thought of doing it in the bugzilla product,
but got scared of being flamed by a bugzilla developer if that's not the
right place ;-)
My problem is that sysfsutils (which is from the sysfsutils source rpm,
I've checked) isn't listed in the current Fedora Core Development
components, and I need to report that it's missing /sbin/ldconfig scriplets
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 2 (Tettnang) - Linux kernel 2.6.8-1.521
Load : 0.16 0.58 0.55