FC1 support is ours...

Tue Sep 14 16:12:07 UTC 2004

Am Di, den 14.09.2004 schrieb Eric Rostetter um 16:40:

> > Eric, reading your requirement for information about yum and apt and
> > update on FC1 I can say, that yum works the same as the yum from Fedora
> > Legacy for RH9. Did you expect something different?
> 
> Well, for one, we don't need to have them install a 3rd party yum, since
> it is in FC1, right?  So the installation instructions will be different.
> Is it installed by default as a standalone program, or not?  How about apt?
> Is it in the standard paths?  Does it run as a service by default? Does it
> include scripts in /etc/rc.d/init.d/ for auto updates?  Or a cron job?

yum and up2date are installed by default on FC1 systems. They come with
a baisc configuration pointing to the Redhat main server (which was the
reason for a lot of problems and why I wrote the article earlier this
year). So both tools work with yum repositories and you just have to
configure them with /etc/yum.conf and /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources to let
them point to the new Fedora Legacy mirror servers. up2date is capable
to handle apt repositories as well. The RHN applet has the limitation to
not properly handle FTP servers (you get an error saying so). An
instructions paper should too contain instructions and hints for users
behind a proxy server. bugzilla.redhat.com has some entries about this.

yum comes with an init script to let it run as a nightly cron job.
update is a standalone tool. But as said, running the RHN applet it will
automatically contact the configured repository each 240 minutes and
check for new packages. Once found one it optically inform you with a
read flashing circle.

> > I never used apt on FC1 for anything but short testings. So I cannot say
> > much valuable.
> 
> Sure you can.  Is it part of FC1?  What's the package name?

No, apt is not part of Fedora _Core_ 1.

http://atrpms.net/dist/fc1/apt/
http://download.fedora.us/fedora/fedora/1/i386/RPMS.stable/apt-0.5.15cnc6-0.fdr.11.1.i386.rpm
http://yarrow.freshrpms.net/rpm.html?id=1048

These are the 3 packaged apt RPMs certainly used by those feeling
uncomfortable with yum or up2date on FC1. Each RPM comes with a
different default setup.

If I may do a suggestion, then contact the packagers and let them adjust
their apt RPMs to handle the future Fedora Legacy locations for FC1. I
could imagine they would do with favour.

> As I've said: I've never run FC1, so I know nothing about it.  I need low
> level info like whether yum and apt are even in FC1 or not as standalone
> applications, etc.

I think everyone running an FC1 install does know at least one of the 3
tools and uses at least one of them.

> So we need a new document about up2date for those who want to use it.
> And how to configure it (still up in there air actually).  And maybe
> why people might want to use yum/apt instead of up2date, etc.

I doubt there are impartitial reasons about preferences for any tool. I
feel comfortable with up2date and very rarely used yum on some systems.
I have 2 RH9 systems, one using yum with FL and on the other apt.

The Fedora Core user's mailing list is full of postings where people
have problems with one of the tools or stating they prefer one over an
other. Best is, to show how to configure each tool and let people decide
their own. Some know apt for instance from Debian and swear on it. Some
do because it does not fetch all the header files and is from their
point of view much faster than yum and up2date.

> Okay, this is the kind of info I need.  That means FL should start creating
> its own apt utility also...

If you prefer. As said above, I would contact the 3 packagers and ask
them to adjust their configuration files for the upcoming changes with
FC1 (end of "support" by Redhat / Fedora Project and further
responsibility by Fedora Legacy). Maybe there is even the will to become
an official mirror for FL at any of them.

> > A couple of month ago I wrote a small article about the need to
> > configure up2date and yum to point to different servers than the default
> > Redhat main server. The article is still available through
> > 
> > http://www.fedoranews.org/contributors/alexander_dalloz/mirror
> > 
> > and may be helpful for you Eric.
> 
> Thanks for the pointer.  Should I take this as permission to copy/paste
> from your article to the web site?  Please confirm/deny.

Sure, you have my permission to use the article as you like. If you
visit the page you see at the bottom "Copyright © 2003-2004
FedoraNEWS.ORG". I am no lawyer and do not know whether that covers my
writings or just the fedoranews.org site in general.

> > If you knock on your head for all I wrote in this mail and saying "man,
> > this is common ground, no news", then please forgive me. I just jumped
> 
> No, there is useful info in there.  But there could be more. :)

Let me know what information is lacking. I am willing to help as much as
I can.

Alexander

-- 
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG key 1024D/ED695653 1999-07-13
Fedora GNU/Linux Core 2 (Tettnang) kernel 2.6.8-1.521smp 
Serendipity 17:38:53 up 15 days, 14:55, load average: 0.69, 0.69, 0.71 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20040914/c1c35f09/attachment.sig>