Forgive me for querrying the Fedora list for this, but I really don't want to subscribe to a Yet Another Mailing List just to have this one single basic question answered. It is quite unlikely that I will be having any more questions about CentOS in the future, so...
Ok, to the problem --- I have one (soon to be two) CentOS 5.2 machine(s), and I seem to miss some packages that I am used to in Fedora:
1) kmod-nvidia and kmod-fglrx --- searching through the web, all I see about CentOS is installing/compiling drivers straight from nVidia and ATI. Are there maintained yumable packages that get autoupdated along with CentOS kernel like the ones for Fedora?
2) BackupPC --- so far it was running quite well for me on Fedora, but it does not seem to exist for CentOS, which comes with some other (equivalent) tools. Am I destined to use those, or am I missing some repository where backuppc can be found? Or should I compile it myself?
3) Cairo-dock --- ok, this is not essential, but I like it :-). However, yum says no matches found.
Just to note, so far I have enabled the default base, extras, updates repositories from CentOS, and in addition the Dag repository for RHEL5 and adobe repository for flash.
<rant> ATrpms has way too obsolete installation instructions (some others too --- Dries comes to mind) to be seriously considered as a reliable repository. For example, Livna has a .rpm file for each Fedora distro that I just have to install and it is ready to go. On ATrpms website I was told to manually edit the .repo files according to the template given for Fedora 7 (!!!), changing some parameters to suit my own distro (???)... Wtf? Did I miss the right instructions page? This is just user-unfriendly, to say the least. But I may even try it out if someone just gives me the exact contents of the appropriate .repo file that works with CentOS 5.2, and if ATrpms has all these packages that I need, updated more often than their website... </rant>
This machine is meant to be unattended (physically, not remotely) for a period of 3 years, so I guessed that CentOS is the distro that would Just Work in such conditions, and at the same time it is similar enough to Fedora that I shall be comfortable admining it remotely as neccessary.
The other machine is to be used as a desktop machine by a serve-on-a-plate kind of user who knows nothing beyond kde menus (hence the question about automatic graphics drivers), also admined by me remotely.
I will be thankful for any suggestions about the above. I do not insist on yum and will content to build from source, if I can be guaranteed that such setup will not break after 3 years of possible (regular) kernel updates.
Excuse me again for not going to CentOS list for this, it seems obvious that a lot of people here use CentOS as well, so... ;-)
Best, :-) Marko
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 11:54 +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Forgive me for querrying the Fedora list for this, but I really don't want to subscribe to a Yet Another Mailing List just to have this one single basic question answered. It is quite unlikely that I will be having any more questions about CentOS in the future, so...
Ok, to the problem --- I have one (soon to be two) CentOS 5.2 machine(s), and I seem to miss some packages that I am used to in Fedora:
- kmod-nvidia and kmod-fglrx --- searching through the web, all I see about
CentOS is installing/compiling drivers straight from nVidia and ATI. Are there maintained yumable packages that get autoupdated along with CentOS kernel like the ones for Fedora?
The EL section of rpmfusion should (hopefully, maybe) support this when rpmfusion is officially up and running which should happen Real Soon Now (tm).
- BackupPC --- so far it was running quite well for me on Fedora, but it does
not seem to exist for CentOS, which comes with some other (equivalent) tools. Am I destined to use those, or am I missing some repository where backuppc can be found? Or should I compile it myself?
- Cairo-dock --- ok, this is not essential, but I like it :-). However, yum
says no matches found.
Have you checked out EPEL (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL)?
Jonathan
On Thursday 02 October 2008 11:53, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
- kmod-nvidia and kmod-fglrx --- searching through the web, all I see
about CentOS is installing/compiling drivers straight from nVidia and ATI. Are there maintained yumable packages that get autoupdated along with CentOS kernel like the ones for Fedora?
The EL section of rpmfusion should (hopefully, maybe) support this when rpmfusion is officially up and running which should happen Real Soon Now (tm).
This is Good News (tm), if the "Real Soon Now (tm)" is Soon Enough (tm). :-) I'll make sure to Be Patient (tm). ;-)
- Cairo-dock --- ok, this is not essential, but I like it :-). However,
yum says no matches found.
Have you checked out EPEL (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL)?
Umm, no, but shall, thanks for the pointer! :-)
Best, :-) Marko
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 11:54:27AM +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Forgive me for querrying the Fedora list for this, but I really don't want to subscribe to a Yet Another Mailing List just to have this one single basic question answered. It is quite unlikely that I will be having any more questions about CentOS in the future, so...
Ok, to the problem --- I have one (soon to be two) CentOS 5.2 machine(s), and I seem to miss some packages that I am used to in Fedora:
- kmod-nvidia and kmod-fglrx --- searching through the web, all I see about
CentOS is installing/compiling drivers straight from nVidia and ATI. Are there maintained yumable packages that get autoupdated along with CentOS kernel like the ones for Fedora?
- BackupPC --- so far it was running quite well for me on Fedora, but it does
not seem to exist for CentOS, which comes with some other (equivalent) tools. Am I destined to use those, or am I missing some repository where backuppc can be found? Or should I compile it myself?
- Cairo-dock --- ok, this is not essential, but I like it :-). However, yum
says no matches found.
Just to note, so far I have enabled the default base, extras, updates repositories from CentOS, and in addition the Dag repository for RHEL5 and adobe repository for flash.
<rant> ATrpms has way too obsolete installation instructions (some others too --- Dries comes to mind) to be seriously considered as a reliable repository. For example, Livna has a .rpm file for each Fedora distro that I just have to install and it is ready to go. On ATrpms website I was told to manually edit the .repo files according to the template given for Fedora 7 (!!!), changing some parameters to suit my own distro (???)... Wtf? Did I miss the right instructions page? This is just user-unfriendly, to say the least. But I may even try it out if someone just gives me the exact contents of the appropriate .repo file that works with CentOS 5.2, and if ATrpms has all these packages that I need, updated more often than their website... </rant>
<rantback> Try http://atrpms.net/name/atrpms-package-config/ </rantback>
This machine is meant to be unattended (physically, not remotely) for a period of 3 years, so I guessed that CentOS is the distro that would Just Work in such conditions, and at the same time it is similar enough to Fedora that I shall be comfortable admining it remotely as neccessary.
The other machine is to be used as a desktop machine by a serve-on-a-plate kind of user who knows nothing beyond kde menus (hence the question about automatic graphics drivers), also admined by me remotely.
I will be thankful for any suggestions about the above. I do not insist on yum and will content to build from source, if I can be guaranteed that such setup will not break after 3 years of possible (regular) kernel updates.
Excuse me again for not going to CentOS list for this, it seems obvious that a lot of people here use CentOS as well, so... ;-)
Best, :-) Marko
On Thursday 02 October 2008 13:24, Axel Thimm wrote:
<rant> ATrpms has way too obsolete installation instructions (some others too --- Dries comes to mind) to be seriously considered as a reliable repository. For example, Livna has a .rpm file for each Fedora distro that I just have to install and it is ready to go. On ATrpms website I was told to manually edit the .repo files according to the template given for Fedora 7 (!!!), changing some parameters to suit my own distro (???)... Wtf? Did I miss the right instructions page? This is just user-unfriendly, to say the least. But I may even try it out if someone just gives me the exact contents of the appropriate .repo file that works with CentOS 5.2, and if ATrpms has all these packages that I need, updated more often than their website... </rant>
<rantback> Try http://atrpms.net/name/atrpms-package-config/ </rantback>
<unrant> Oh, well, that is a nice surprise! Apologies for the rant. :-) </unrant>
Btw, what is medley?
Best, :-) Marko
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 08:07:04PM +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Thursday 02 October 2008 13:24, Axel Thimm wrote:
<rant> ATrpms has way too obsolete installation instructions (some others too --- Dries comes to mind) to be seriously considered as a reliable repository. For example, Livna has a .rpm file for each Fedora distro that I just have to install and it is ready to go. On ATrpms website I was told to manually edit the .repo files according to the template given for Fedora 7 (!!!), changing some parameters to suit my own distro (???)... Wtf? Did I miss the right instructions page? This is just user-unfriendly, to say the least. But I may even try it out if someone just gives me the exact contents of the appropriate .repo file that works with CentOS 5.2, and if ATrpms has all these packages that I need, updated more often than their website... </rant>
<rantback> Try http://atrpms.net/name/atrpms-package-config/ </rantback>
<unrant> Oh, well, that is a nice surprise! Apologies for the rant. :-) </unrant>
Btw, what is medley?
An old attempt to provide a package that would enable many 3rd party repos. The attempt failed because the repos would not report new/old repo support and the medley was getting out of date.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 11:54:27AM +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Forgive me for querrying the Fedora list for this, but I really don't want to subscribe to a Yet Another Mailing List just to have this one single basic question answered. It is quite unlikely that I will be having any more questions about CentOS in the future, so...
Have you checked the CentOS forums and wiki? There's bound to be lots of good info available there.
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 11:54 +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Forgive me for querrying the Fedora list for this, but I really don't want to subscribe to a Yet Another Mailing List just to have this one single basic question answered. It is quite unlikely that I will be having any more questions about CentOS in the future, so...
I'm looking for information on re-nailing all the galvanised iron back onto our roof, as after some 40 years they nails are starting to work loose from the beams, and I don't want to go elsewhere and ask the question more appropriately.
Tim, less tolerant of inappropriate mailing list use, today, than I usually am.
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
- kmod-nvidia and kmod-fglrx --- searching through the web, all I see
about CentOS is installing/compiling drivers straight from nVidia and ATI. Are there maintained yumable packages that get autoupdated along with CentOS kernel like the ones for Fedora?
I didn't read the whole thread, but did anyone mention the epel.repo : "Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5"? This is a sort of official redhat repository with extra packages for CentOS.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
I didn't read the whole thread, but did anyone mention the epel.repo : "Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5"? This is a sort of official redhat repository with extra packages for CentOS.
Who is lazier? The OP who can't be bothered to find appropriate support channels or you for not even looking at what was said previously? What does "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora" mean?
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2008-October/msg00224.html
Regards, Vandaman.
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 12:11:16 +0000 (GMT), Vandaman wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
I didn't read the whole thread, but did anyone mention the epel.repo : "Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5"? This is a sort of official redhat repository with extra packages for CentOS.
Who is lazier? The OP who can't be bothered to find appropriate support channels or you for not even looking at what was said previously? What does "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora" mean?
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2008-October/msg00224.html
EPEL is a Fedora project: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
And since it doesn't offer any list for its users, but just epel-devel-list for its contributors, one could say that talking about EPEL packages here on fedora-list is not fully off-topic. The problem with the original post is merely that it comments on lots of things that are not related to Fedora or EPEL at all. And since EPEL is built for RHEL, one could also post on the RHEL related mailing-lists about it.
Michael Schwendt wrote:
EPEL is a Fedora project: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
And since it doesn't offer any list for its users, but just epel-devel-list for its contributors, one could say that talking about EPEL packages here on fedora-list is not fully off-topic. The problem with the original post is merely that it comments on lots of things that are not related to Fedora or EPEL at all. And since EPEL is built for RHEL, one could also post on the RHEL related mailing-lists about it.
As a CentOS user I would class EPEL and ATRPMS as 4th party repos, as there are guidelines on the CentOS Wiki for CentOS/RHEL friendly repos which I would class as 3rd party. As the OP has no intention of reading up on those, let us leave him to his own devices.
Good luck to the OP and anyone using 4th party repos, if anything breaks they get to keep the pieces :-)
Regards, Vandaman.
Vandaman <vandaman2002-rt <at> yahoo.co.uk> writes:
As a CentOS user I would class EPEL and ATRPMS as 4th party repos, as there are guidelines on the CentOS Wiki for CentOS/RHEL friendly repos which I would class as 3rd party. As the OP has no intention of reading up on those, let us leave him to his own devices.
Good luck to the OP and anyone using 4th party repos, if anything breaks they get to keep the pieces
Please don't believe or spread this FUD!
EPEL is more like a 2nd-party repo than a 4th-party repo. It is tested with both RHEL and CentOS and has a strict policy of not mucking with RHEL/CentOS packages (unlike some other repos which will happily replace RHEL/CentOS packages with newer or patched versions) and it is promoted by Red Hat (though its use is not supported commercially by Red Hat, but neither is CentOS nor the repositories you're recommending).
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/About https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ
Kevin Kofler
Vandaman wrote:
I didn't read the whole thread, but did anyone mention the epel.repo : "Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5"? This is a sort of official redhat repository with extra packages for CentOS.
Who is lazier? The OP who can't be bothered to find appropriate support channels or you for not even looking at what was said previously? What does "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora" mean?
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2008-October/msg00224.html
So what exactly is your point? I'd say you are the laziest of the three, for not taking the time to say clearly whatever you mean. If you have no useful contribution to make, I suggest you keep quiet.
Perhaps you should read the words you just wrote: ENCOURAGEMENT and ADVICE.