x86_64 and i386 rpms
by Paul F. Johnson
Hi,
I have duplicate copies of x86_64 and i386 rpms installed on my box
(this appears to have occured when I did the full install a few weeks
back on the new 64bit box).
Is there any problem with me ditching the i386 rpms or to they provide
something the 64 bit versions don't?
TTFN
Paul
--
main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0<t?t<3?main(-79,-13,a+main(-87,1-_,main(-86,
0,a+1 )+a)):1,t<_?main(t+1,_,a ):3,main (-94,-27+t,a)&&t==2?_<13?main(2,
_+1,"%s %d %d\n"):9:16:t<0?t<-72?main(_,t,"@n'+,#'/*{}w+/w#cdnr/+,{}r/*de}
+,/*{*+,/w{%+,/w#q#n+,/#{l,+,/n{n+,/+#n+,/#;#q#n+,/+k#;*+,/'r :'d*'3,}{w+K
w'K:'+}e#';dq#'l q#'+d'K#!/+k#;q#'r}eKK#}w'r}eKK{nl]'/#;#q#n'){)#}w'){){nl]
'/+#n';d}rw' i;# ){nl]!/n{n#'; r{#w'r nc{nl]'/#{l,+'K {rw' iK{;[{nl]'/w#q#n
'wk nw' iwk{KK{nl]!/w{%'l##w#' i; :{nl]'/*{q#'ld;r'}{nlwb!/*de}'c ;;{nl'-{}
rw]'/+,}##'*}#nc,',#nw]'/+kd'+e}+;#'rdq#w! nr'/ ') }+}{rl#'{n' ')# }'+}##
(!!/"):t<-50?_==*a?putchar(31[a]):main(-65,_,a+1):main((*a=='/')+t,_,a+1
):0<t?main(2,2,"%s"):*a=='/'||main(0,main(-61,*a,"!ek;dc i@bK'(q)-[w]*%n+r3#l
,{}:\nuwloca-O;m .vpbks,fxntdCeghiry"),a+1);}
15 years
x86_64 and i386 rpms
by Paul F. Johnson
Hi,
I have duplicate copies of x86_64 and i386 rpms installed on my box
(this appears to have occured when I did the full install a few weeks
back on the new 64bit box).
Is there any problem with me ditching the i386 rpms or to they provide
something the 64 bit versions don't?
TTFN
Paul
--
main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0<t?t<3?main(-79,-13,a+main(-87,1-_,main(-86,
0,a+1 )+a)):1,t<_?main(t+1,_,a ):3,main (-94,-27+t,a)&&t==2?_<13?main(2,
_+1,"%s %d %d\n"):9:16:t<0?t<-72?main(_,t,"@n'+,#'/*{}w+/w#cdnr/+,{}r/*de}
+,/*{*+,/w{%+,/w#q#n+,/#{l,+,/n{n+,/+#n+,/#;#q#n+,/+k#;*+,/'r :'d*'3,}{w+K
w'K:'+}e#';dq#'l q#'+d'K#!/+k#;q#'r}eKK#}w'r}eKK{nl]'/#;#q#n'){)#}w'){){nl]
'/+#n';d}rw' i;# ){nl]!/n{n#'; r{#w'r nc{nl]'/#{l,+'K {rw' iK{;[{nl]'/w#q#n
'wk nw' iwk{KK{nl]!/w{%'l##w#' i; :{nl]'/*{q#'ld;r'}{nlwb!/*de}'c ;;{nl'-{}
rw]'/+,}##'*}#nc,',#nw]'/+kd'+e}+;#'rdq#w! nr'/ ') }+}{rl#'{n' ')# }'+}##
(!!/"):t<-50?_==*a?putchar(31[a]):main(-65,_,a+1):main((*a=='/')+t,_,a+1
):0<t?main(2,2,"%s"):*a=='/'||main(0,main(-61,*a,"!ek;dc i@bK'(q)-[w]*%n+r3#l
,{}:\nuwloca-O;m .vpbks,fxntdCeghiry"),a+1);}
15 years
x86_64 and i386 rpms
by Paul F. Johnson
Hi,
I have duplicate copies of x86_64 and i386 rpms installed on my box
(this appears to have occured when I did the full install a few weeks
back on the new 64bit box).
Is there any problem with me ditching the i386 rpms or to they provide
something the 64 bit versions don't?
TTFN
Paul
--
main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0<t?t<3?main(-79,-13,a+main(-87,1-_,main(-86,
0,a+1 )+a)):1,t<_?main(t+1,_,a ):3,main (-94,-27+t,a)&&t==2?_<13?main(2,
_+1,"%s %d %d\n"):9:16:t<0?t<-72?main(_,t,"@n'+,#'/*{}w+/w#cdnr/+,{}r/*de}
+,/*{*+,/w{%+,/w#q#n+,/#{l,+,/n{n+,/+#n+,/#;#q#n+,/+k#;*+,/'r :'d*'3,}{w+K
w'K:'+}e#';dq#'l q#'+d'K#!/+k#;q#'r}eKK#}w'r}eKK{nl]'/#;#q#n'){)#}w'){){nl]
'/+#n';d}rw' i;# ){nl]!/n{n#'; r{#w'r nc{nl]'/#{l,+'K {rw' iK{;[{nl]'/w#q#n
'wk nw' iwk{KK{nl]!/w{%'l##w#' i; :{nl]'/*{q#'ld;r'}{nlwb!/*de}'c ;;{nl'-{}
rw]'/+,}##'*}#nc,',#nw]'/+kd'+e}+;#'rdq#w! nr'/ ') }+}{rl#'{n' ')# }'+}##
(!!/"):t<-50?_==*a?putchar(31[a]):main(-65,_,a+1):main((*a=='/')+t,_,a+1
):0<t?main(2,2,"%s"):*a=='/'||main(0,main(-61,*a,"!ek;dc i@bK'(q)-[w]*%n+r3#l
,{}:\nuwloca-O;m .vpbks,fxntdCeghiry"),a+1);}
15 years
kernel-2.6.14-1.1637, 1653: long delay after "Uncompressing..." phase
by Ville Herva
Since kernel-2.6.14-1.1637, there has been a long delay during boot after
the "Uncompressing..." line. It takes about a minute or so, and judging
from the sound of the fan, it appears to take 100% CPU. Observed on a Compaq
AP250 PIII 866MHz. Earlier kernels did not have this glitch.
Ok:
kernel-2.6.12-1.1398_FC4
kernel-2.6.12-1.1447_FC4
kernel-2.6.12-1.1456_FC4
kernel-2.6.13-1.1526_FC4
kernel-2.6.13-1.1532_FC4
Long delay (about minute or so):
kernel-2.6.14-1.1637_FC4
kernel-2.6.14-1.1653_FC4
Hardware:
Vendor: Compaq
Version: 686J2 v2.04
Release Date: 12/04/2000
Address: 0xE0000
Runtime Size: 128 kB
ROM Size: 512 kB
Manufacturer: Compaq
Product Name: Professional Workstation AP250
Socket Designation: XU1
Type: Central Processor
Family: Pentium III
Manufacturer: Intel
Signature: Type 0, Family 6, Model 8, Stepping 6
Version: Pentium(R) III processor 866 MHz
Voltage: 2.0 V
External Clock: 133 MHz
Max Speed: 1000 MHz
Current Speed: 866 MHz
15 years
xorg-x11-drivers
by Clyde E. Kunkel
Hello,
Is it safe to just yum update the specific xorg-x11-drv-<driver> for my
graphics card instead of installing all of them? yum wanted to update
install about 53 drivers it looks like.
--
Regards,
Old Fart
(my reply to address is "munged" to avoid spambots)
15 years
#prelink# semi-disaster
by Jim Cornette
Trying to launch ppracer, I ended up having a permission error. When
investigating the library which I was having permission errors with, I
found out that the library was linked to a #prelink#<random-number> file.
Deleting all of the #prelink#<random> from /tmp left one obviously
broken symlink to /usr/lib/libGL.so.1
Anyway, is there an option to any option to find broken symlinks
system-wide.
Most importantly, for programs that can break the sanity of the system
if you are shutting down the computer, are there any mechanisms being
developed to prevent system shutdown until processes such as prelink,
updating system in the background are not in a sane condition.
To fix the above problem, I deleted the database entries for the library
that had the broken dep and all associated rpms. I then yum installed
the same packages that were db entry only removed.
Jim
--
My computer can beat up your computer.
- Karl Lehenbauer
15 years
Re: generating zope.conf (zope 2.9) patch
by Mihamina Rakotomandimby
> > I edited Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in
> > And generated the patch as folllow.
> > $ diff -Naur Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original
> You are in a wrong directory judging from what you write later.
> > Patch #0 (zope-2.9.0-config.patch):
> > + patch -p1 -b --suffix .config -s
> If you have this '-p1' then you should start in BUILD/ when creating
> patch.
Ok. Thank you.
> > %setup -q -n Zope-%{version} #-a 10
> So your top directory is not called 'Zope'.
Erm... The sources unpack into a directory called
Zope-2.9-xxx
Then there is a subdir in it, called "Zope".
> > %patch0 -p1 -b .config
> Possibly '-p0' above instead of '-p1', which means "skip one level
> of directories", will be good enough although patches to be used
> with '-p1' better document how they were really generated (which
> may be useful in the future).
I'll try and report.
Plese would you reply on the list? so that more people can discuss :-)
I already set the Reply-To address, if the Mailing List manager does not
overwrite it, just replying will be OK.
--
A powerfull GroupWare, CMS, CRM, ECM: CPS (Open Source & GPL).
Opengroupware, SPIP, Plone, PhpBB, JetSpeed... are good: CPS is better.
http://www.cps-project.org for downloads & documentation.
Free hosting of CPS groupware: http://www.objectis.org.
15 years
Today's attempted rawhide install
by Mike Chambers
I too have also ran into the kernel oops from trying to install rawhide
this morning.
I understand a bug has already been filed for this. Is there a fix in
the works or set to come out today by chance?
--
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY
"It's only funny until someone gets hurt, then it's hilarious!"
15 years
generating zope.conf (zope 2.9) patch
by Mihamina Rakotomandimby
Hi,
I am packaging zope 2.9 (wich, at this time is in beta version) in order
to have a ready RPM package when it's released as final stable.
The sample configuration file is not the same anymore, and the patch for
zope 2.8s is obsolete for 2.9.
$ cd /source/directory
$ mv Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original
I edited Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in
And generated the patch as folllow.
$ diff -Naur Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original
Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in
--- Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original 2005-12-21 12:09:22.000000000
+0100
+++ Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in 2005-12-26 14:28:10.000000000 +0100
@@ -146,7 +146,8 @@
#
# Example:
#
-# effective-user chrism
+
+effective-user <<ZOPE_USER>>
# Directive: enable-product-installation
@@ -510,7 +511,8 @@
#
# Example:
#
-# security-policy-implementation python
+
+security-policy-implementation python
# Directive: skip-authentication-checking
######################################################
################ End of the patch ####################
######################################################
Then I save it under the SOURCES directory
$ diff -Naur Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original \
Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in >\
/usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/zope-2.9.0-config.patch
$ rpmbuild -ba zope.spec
[...]
+ echo 'Patch #0 (zope-2.9.0-config.patch):'
Patch #0 (zope-2.9.0-config.patch):
+ patch -p1 -b --suffix .config -s
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in.original 2005-12-21
12:09:22.000000000 +0100
|+++ Zope/skel/etc/zope.conf.in 2005-12-26 14:28:10.000000000 +0100
--------------------------
File to patch:
What did I do wrong?
I attach the specfile.
--
A powerfull GroupWare, CMS, CRM, ECM: CPS (Open Source & GPL).
Opengroupware, SPIP, Plone, PhpBB, JetSpeed... are good: CPS is better.
http://www.cps-project.org for downloads & documentation.
Free hosting of CPS groupware: http://www.objectis.org.
15 years
FC5 - printing
by Res
Hey All,
Hope everyone is enjoying their holidays, well everyone unlike those of us
still working/on call etc :(
Has anyone tried the current test and had good results with default
setup for either Epson C65 or Oki 7550 .... or do we have to remove
gimp-print and install gutenprint for the drivers still...
--
Cheers
Res
15 years