From geek at uniserve.com Tue Aug 1 20:25:49 2006 From: geek at uniserve.com (Dave Stevens) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 13:25:49 -0700 Subject: repos? Message-ID: <200608011325.50010.geek@uniserve.com> Hi, I am new to this list. Will someone please point me to a FAQ? and especially to info about repos for use with my FC3? Thanks, Dave -- I found one day in school a boy of medium size ill-treating a smaller boy. I expostulated, but he replied: 'The bigs hit me, so I hit the babies; that's fair.' In these words he epitomized the history of the human race. -Bertrand Russell in Education and the Social Order From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Aug 1 20:31:56 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit Internet)) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 22:31:56 +0200 Subject: repos? In-Reply-To: <200608011325.50010.geek@uniserve.com> References: <200608011325.50010.geek@uniserve.com> Message-ID: Dave Stevens wrote: > I am new to this list. Will someone please point me to a FAQ? and > especially > to info about repos for use with my FC3? Just check the website: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/docs/yum-fc3.php Nils Breunese. From geek at uniserve.com Tue Aug 1 22:49:30 2006 From: geek at uniserve.com (Dave Stevens) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 15:49:30 -0700 Subject: repos? In-Reply-To: References: <200608011325.50010.geek@uniserve.com> Message-ID: <200608011549.30370.geek@uniserve.com> On Tue August 1 2006 13:31, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit Internet) wrote: > Dave Stevens wrote: > > I am new to this list. Will someone please point me to a FAQ? and > > especially > > to info about repos for use with my FC3? > > Just check the website: http://www.fedoralegacy.org/docs/yum-fc3.php > > Nils Breunese. I've done that, followed instructions (as far as I can see) and run "yum update" after a lot of checking of various sorts the last few lines of output are as follows... --> Processing Dependency: libavcodec.so.51 for package: vlc --> Processing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a for package: k3b-ffmpeg --> Processing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 for package: mplayer-codecs --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Missing Dependency: libicui18n.so.26 is needed by package mono-core Error: Missing Dependency: libpostproc.so.51.0.0 is needed by package vlc Error: Missing Dependency: libavformat.so.50 is needed by package vlc Error: Missing Dependency: libicudata.so.26 is needed by package mono-core Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 is needed by package mplayer-codec s-extra Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer = 1.0-0.lvn.0.33.pre7try2.3 is needed by pack age mplayer-gui Error: Missing Dependency: libk3b.so.1 is needed by package k3b-ffmpeg Error: Missing Dependency: libicuuc.so.26 is needed by package mono-core Error: Missing Dependency: libavutil.so.49 is needed by package vlc Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 is needed by package mplayer-codec s Error: Missing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a is needed by package k3b-ffmpeg Error: Missing Dependency: libk3b.so.1 is needed by package k3b-lame Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer = 1.0-0.lvn.0.33.pre7try2.3 is needed by pack age mplayer-mencoder Error: Missing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a is needed by package k3b-lame Error: Missing Dependency: libavcodec.so.51 is needed by package vlc [root at localhost ~]# Does anyone care to offer suggestions as to where to go from here? Can I exclude the problem packages from the update? Dave > > -- > fedora-legacy-list mailing list > fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list -- I found one day in school a boy of medium size ill-treating a smaller boy. I expostulated, but he replied: 'The bigs hit me, so I hit the babies; that's fair.' In these words he epitomized the history of the human race. -Bertrand Russell in Education and the Social Order From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Aug 1 23:20:00 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit Internet)) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 01:20:00 +0200 Subject: repos? In-Reply-To: <200608011549.30370.geek@uniserve.com> References: <200608011325.50010.geek@uniserve.com> <200608011549.30370.geek@uniserve.com> Message-ID: <75C59124-E0D9-4A32-BB2E-678269A83255@lemonbit.nl> Dave Stevens wrote: > I've done that, followed instructions (as far as I can see) and > run "yum > update" > > after a lot of checking of various sorts the last few lines of > output are as > follows... > > --> Processing Dependency: libavcodec.so.51 for package: vlc > --> Processing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a for package: k3b-ffmpeg > --> Processing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 for package: mplayer- > codecs > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > Error: Missing Dependency: libicui18n.so.26 is needed by package > mono-core > Error: Missing Dependency: libpostproc.so.51.0.0 is needed by > package vlc > Error: Missing Dependency: libavformat.so.50 is needed by package vlc > Error: Missing Dependency: libicudata.so.26 is needed by package > mono-core > Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 is needed by package > mplayer-codec s-extra > Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer = 1.0-0.lvn.0.33.pre7try2.3 is > needed by > pack age mplayer-gui > Error: Missing Dependency: libk3b.so.1 is needed by package k3b-ffmpeg > Error: Missing Dependency: libicuuc.so.26 is needed by package mono- > core > Error: Missing Dependency: libavutil.so.49 is needed by package vlc > Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer >= 1.0pre7 is needed by package > mplayer-codec s > Error: Missing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a is needed by package k3b- > ffmpeg > Error: Missing Dependency: libk3b.so.1 is needed by package k3b-lame > Error: Missing Dependency: mplayer = 1.0-0.lvn.0.33.pre7try2.3 is > needed by > pack age mplayer-mencoder > Error: Missing Dependency: k3b = 0:0.12.4a is needed by package k3b- > lame > Error: Missing Dependency: libavcodec.so.51 is needed by package vlc > [root at localhost ~]# > > Does anyone care to offer suggestions as to where to go from here? > Can I > exclude the problem packages from the update? Seems like you have (had?) a third party repository (livna I guess?) in your configuration that's causing these dependency problems. Of course you can always exclude packages, but I'd check my repository config. Looks like a desktop system to me though, so I'd just upgrade to FC5 instead. Nils Breunese. From forsberg+fedoralegacy at cendio.se Fri Aug 4 08:42:43 2006 From: forsberg+fedoralegacy at cendio.se (Erik Forsberg) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 10:42:43 +0200 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> (Jesse Keating's message of "Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:44:54 -0400") References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: Jesse Keating writes: > As to our Red Hat Linux releases (7.3 and 9) the following has been decided: > > New issues (bugs) will be accepted until October 1st of this year. No new > bugs will be accepted after that mark. All existing bugs will be resolved to > the best of our ability by December 31st of this year. What hasn't been > completed by then will not be completed by the Fedora Legacy project. This > will be the end of Fedora Legacy's support of the Red Hat Linux line of > distributions. We will continue focusing our efforts on the Fedora Core > line, and improving our integration with the Fedora project in > whole. I fully understand the background to this decision, and I would like to thank the fedora legacy team for providing support for these distribution so long. Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? Thanks, \EF -- Erik Forsberg OpenSource-based Thin Client Technology Systems Analyst/Developer Phone: +46-13-21 46 00 Cendio AB Web: http://www.cendio.com From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Fri Aug 4 19:10:30 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 14:10:30 -0500 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <20060804141030.y0ihruzapwxwk080@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Erik Forsberg : > I fully understand the background to this decision, and I would like > to thank the fedora legacy team for providing support for these > distribution so long. AFAIK, FL is the last to drop support for these, as far as security backports goes (as compared to updating packages to newer versions). > Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there > any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security > updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? You can see if you can get a custom arrangement with http://transition.progeny.com/ They killed off their support also, but their page leads me to believe they might be willing to do individual support contracts still... Other than that, I would think you are out of luck with 7.3 machines... Just too old for anyone to take seriously any more... -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 5 17:15:50 2006 From: Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net (Mike McCarty) Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 12:15:50 -0500 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> Erik Forsberg wrote: [snip] > Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there > any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security > updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? You might ask over on CentOS. But beware: The social atmosphere is not so congenial as here at FL. Mike -- p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} This message made from 100% recycled bits. You have found the bank of Larn. I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you. I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that! From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sat Aug 5 21:45:16 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 17:45:16 -0400 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <1154814316.3092.2.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 12:15 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: > Erik Forsberg wrote: > > [snip] > > > Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there > > any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security > > updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? > > You might ask over on CentOS. But beware: The social atmosphere is > not so congenial as here at FL. umm. what? I've found the centos community to be very helpful. then again - I'm not sure what there is to need help on w/centos. There's not much in the way of excitement w/it. That is, after all, the point. :) -sv From jancio_wodnik at wp.pl Sun Aug 6 20:48:50 2006 From: jancio_wodnik at wp.pl (Jancio Wodnik) Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:48:50 +0200 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <44D655B2.9030202@wp.pl> Mike McCarty napisa?(a): > Erik Forsberg wrote: > > [snip] > >> Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there >> any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security >> updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? > > You might ask over on CentOS. But beware: The social atmosphere is > not so congenial as here at FL. > > Mike Yes, i agree with you. I have some bad expirences on centos irc channel. You cann't ask some question, because you are seen as some "idiot", "dumb" or so. Besides of this, the irc chanel #centos are suitable only for person closley bundle with centos (centos developer), not for outsiders. It's my feelings. For 99% centos user suitable irc channel is probably #centos-social or so. So, i use centos, but don't use centos irc channel. See ya. Irens From jancio_wodnik at wp.pl Sun Aug 6 20:49:05 2006 From: jancio_wodnik at wp.pl (Jancio Wodnik) Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:49:05 +0200 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <44D655C1.109@wp.pl> Mike McCarty napisa?(a): > Erik Forsberg wrote: > > [snip] > >> Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there >> any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security >> updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? > > You might ask over on CentOS. But beware: The social atmosphere is > not so congenial as here at FL. > > Mike Yes, i agree with you. I have some bad expirences on centos irc channel. You cann't ask some question, because you are seen as some "idiot", "dumb" or so. Besides of this, the irc chanel #centos are suitable only for person closley bundle with centos (centos developer), not for outsiders. It's my feelings. For 99% centos user suitable irc channel is probably #centos-social or so. So, i use centos, but don't use centos irc channel. See ya. Irens From ralph+fedora at strg-alt-entf.org Mon Aug 7 10:13:34 2006 From: ralph+fedora at strg-alt-entf.org (Ralph Angenendt) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 12:13:34 +0200 Subject: Announcing End of Life times (Fedora Core 1, 2, Red Hat Linux 7.3, 9) In-Reply-To: <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> References: <200607221344.54567.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44D4D246.4030302@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20060807101334.GO5133@br-online.de> Mike McCarty wrote: > Erik Forsberg wrote: > > [snip] > > >Now, if I still need to have some RHL7.3 machines running, are there > >any commercial alternatives available to fedora legacy for security > >updates? I haven't any, but perhaps my Google luck is not good enough? > > You might ask over on CentOS. But beware: The social atmosphere is > not so congenial as here at FL. Ummm. Hu? Threads on the mailing list tend to erupt sometimes, but that seems normal to me. Otherwise the mailing list normally is very helpful. But that's off topic here, I guess ... Regards, Ralph -- Ralph Angenendt......ra at br-online.de | .."Text processing has made it possible Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 M?nchen | ....to right-justify any idea, even one Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any other Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan, USC -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at j2solutions.net Mon Aug 7 17:59:24 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 13:59:24 -0400 Subject: Fedora Core 4 Support Message-ID: <200608071359.38620.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Fedora Core 4 support has been transferred to Fedora Legacy! With the release of Fedora Core 6 Test 2, Fedora Core 4 enters maintenance mode, where Fedora Legacy will be responsible for security and major bugfix updates. At this time we also announce the end of life for Fedora Core 1 and 2. No new bugreports will be accepted, existing reports will be closed out as best as we can. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Aug 9 03:09:18 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:09:18 -0500 Subject: Legacy CVS FC-4 branch created Message-ID: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> The FC-4 Branch for legacy has been created. /cvs/legacy/ I still haven't completely automated this branch creation process but I'm close. I'll defaintly be able to automate it for FC-5 when it goes to legacy. The lookaside cache should be done by the end of the night, I'll send a follow up when it is. -Mike From jkeating at redhat.com Wed Aug 9 03:10:55 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 23:10:55 -0400 Subject: Legacy CVS FC-4 branch created In-Reply-To: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200608082310.59180.jkeating@redhat.com> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 23:09, Mike McGrath wrote: > /cvs/legacy/ > > I still haven't completely automated this branch creation process but > I'm close. ?I'll defaintly be able to automate it for FC-5 when it > goes to legacy. ?The lookaside cache should be done by the end of the > night, I'll send a follow up when it is. Rock! -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Aug 9 05:08:57 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 00:08:57 -0500 Subject: Legacy CVS FC-4 branch created In-Reply-To: <200608082310.59180.jkeating@redhat.com> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <200608082310.59180.jkeating@redhat.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410608082208l7ed657f6o567387a22a01583b@mail.gmail.com> On 8/8/06, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tuesday 08 August 2006 23:09, Mike McGrath wrote: > > /cvs/legacy/ > > > > I still haven't completely automated this branch creation process but > > I'm close. I'll defaintly be able to automate it for FC-5 when it > > goes to legacy. The lookaside cache should be done by the end of the > > night, I'll send a follow up when it is. Follow up: look-aside cache for FC-4 legacy is done, presently FC-[3-4] look-aside cache is 6.4G. Jesse, let me know if anything is broken. Also as per our discussion on IRC, let me know when that other SRPM is available. -Mike From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Wed Aug 9 12:03:35 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:03:35 -0400 Subject: Legacy CVS FC-4 branch created In-Reply-To: <3237e4410608082208l7ed657f6o567387a22a01583b@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <200608082310.59180.jkeating@redhat.com> <3237e4410608082208l7ed657f6o567387a22a01583b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44D9CF17.5030805@cs.ucsb.edu> Mike McGrath wrote: > On 8/8/06, Jesse Keating wrote: >> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 23:09, Mike McGrath wrote: >> > /cvs/legacy/ >> > >> > I still haven't completely automated this branch creation process but >> > I'm close. I'll defaintly be able to automate it for FC-5 when it >> > goes to legacy. The lookaside cache should be done by the end of the >> > night, I'll send a follow up when it is. > > Follow up: look-aside cache for FC-4 legacy is done, presently > FC-[3-4] look-aside cache is 6.4G. Jesse, let me know if anything is > broken. Also as per our discussion on IRC, let me know when that > other SRPM is available. > > -Mike > Cool, Mike. Thanks for setting that up for us. -Jeff From d.terweij at nettuning.net Wed Aug 9 12:37:04 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:37:04 +0200 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum Message-ID: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> yum info glibc : [...cut...] Name : glibc Arch : i686 Version: 2.3.6 Release: 0.fc3.1 Size : 12 M Repo : installed Summary: The GNU libc libraries. [...cut...] Available Packages Name : glibc Arch : i386 Version: 2.3.6 Release: 0.fc3.1 Size : 4.2 M Repo : legacy-updates Summary: The GNU libc libraries. Duplicate packages? Why so much in size different? How to solve my problem that an application cant find a proper glibc. Danny. From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Aug 9 12:39:22 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 08:39:22 -0400 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum In-Reply-To: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <200608090839.22754.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Wednesday 09 August 2006 08:37, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net wrote: > Duplicate packages? Why so much in size different? ?How to solve my problem > that an application cant find a proper glibc. Note that one is glibc compiled for i386, and one is glibc compiled specifically for i686. They are two different packages. Why don't you show us what the real problem your having is? -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From d.terweij at nettuning.net Wed Aug 9 12:54:08 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:54:08 +0200 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <200608090839.22754.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <084101c6bbb2$e79e4580$1e00a8c0@prvd321> From: "Jesse Keating" >> Duplicate packages? Why so much in size different? How to solve my problem >> that an application cant find a proper glibc. >Note that one is glibc compiled for i386, and one is glibc compiled >specifically for i686. They are two different packages. >Why don't you show us what the real problem your having is? http://forums.cpanel.net/showthread.php?t=55912 If you can open and read the forum.. cpanel can't build apache/php/modules. Many persons has this error. "Your operating system's rpm update method (yum) was not able to locate the glibc package. This is an indication of an improper setup. You must correct this error before you can proceed. Please correct the conflicts and try again! " Danny. From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Aug 9 13:07:01 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:07:01 -0400 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum In-Reply-To: <084101c6bbb2$e79e4580$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <200608090839.22754.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <084101c6bbb2$e79e4580$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <200608090907.01348.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Wednesday 09 August 2006 08:54, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net wrote: > If you can open and read the forum.. > > cpanel can't build apache/php/modules. > Many persons has this error. > > "Your operating system's rpm update method (yum) was not able to locate the > glibc package. This is an indication of an improper setup. You must correct > this error before you can proceed. > Please correct the conflicts and try again! It appears I need a login for the forum. Lame. Ugh, cpanel. Well, I have no idea what they're trying to do with glibc, you obviously have it installed. Perhaps its looking for a specific version that maybe they provide? Have you followed their instructions to the letter, on the exact version of Fedora they are designed for? Have you asked the cpanel company for help? -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From d.terweij at nettuning.net Wed Aug 9 13:19:44 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:19:44 +0200 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321><200608090839.22754.jkeating@j2solutions.net><084101c6bbb2$e79e4580$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <200608090907.01348.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <089001c6bbb6$7af49890$1e00a8c0@prvd321> From: "Jesse Keating" >Ugh, cpanel. Well, I have no idea what they're trying to do with glibc, you >obviously have it installed. Perhaps its looking for a specific version that >maybe they provide? Have you followed their instructions to the letter, on >the exact version of Fedora they are designed for? Have you asked the cpanel >company for help? Yes, bug report opened. And this error exists already for a few months and many systems with "yum" have this trouble. I believe i seen FC1-FC3 and even RHEL3/4 and CentOS I just thought lets try it also on this list. You never know :) Danny. From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Aug 9 14:09:52 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 10:09:52 -0400 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum In-Reply-To: <089001c6bbb6$7af49890$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <200608090907.01348.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <089001c6bbb6$7af49890$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <200608091009.53108.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Wednesday 09 August 2006 09:19, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net wrote: > Yes, bug report opened. And this error exists already for a few months and > many systems with "yum" have this trouble. > I believe i seen FC1-FC3 and even RHEL3/4 and CentOS What is it trying to install? You already have glibc installed, I'm not getting what its trying to do. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From d.terweij at nettuning.net Wed Aug 9 18:48:26 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 20:48:26 +0200 Subject: [FC3] glibc problem with yum References: <082c01c6bbb0$85705e90$1e00a8c0@prvd321><200608090907.01348.jkeating@j2solutions.net><089001c6bbb6$7af49890$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <200608091009.53108.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <099601c6bbe4$663d5170$1e00a8c0@prvd321> From: "Jesse Keating" >> Yes, bug report opened. And this error exists already for a few months and >> many systems with "yum" have this trouble. >> I believe i seen FC1-FC3 and even RHEL3/4 and CentOS >What is it trying to install? You already have glibc installed, I'm not >getting what its trying to do. This is part of a rebuild system for apache and php modules (custom builds not FC3 packages). First it downloads the main rebuild script from cpanel sites. Then it executes it. Then it checks the system and getting this glibc. The more in look at it, i think its the mechanism of that cpanel script that (that uses to detect what version glibc is installed with yum info glibc) fails somewhere. But cant proof anything yet. Anyway thanks for the answers. Will go further on the cpanel forums. Danny. From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 9 21:55:20 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:55:20 -0500 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created In-Reply-To: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo that FC4 people can use with yum? -- ======================================================================= Beware of computerized fortune-tellers! ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net From michal at harddata.com Thu Aug 10 19:08:08 2006 From: michal at harddata.com (Michal Jaegermann) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:08:08 -0600 Subject: mozilla (seamonkey) and firefox for FC4 Message-ID: <20060810190808.GA26453@mail.harddata.com> For those interested in further checking, maybe cleanup and development there are available ftp://ftp.harddata.com/pub/Legacy_srpms/seamonkey-1.0.4-0.4.2.fc4.0.mj.src.rpm ftp://ftp.harddata.com/pub/Legacy_srpms/firefox-1.5.0.6-2.fc4.0.mj.src.rpm This is "replace mozilla as in RHEL model" seamonkey which provides 'mozilla' executable and corresponding libraries with dependencies, as opposed to what you can find in 'extras' which can be installed in parallel to now obsoleted mozilla packages. A spec file is sort of a cross of a spec from RHEL and extra packages and older mozilla. Firefox was derived from firefox-1.5.0.6-2.fc5 update by dropping pieces which do not fit FC4 (cairo, system nss and nspr and corresponding changes in firefox-mozconfig). Only after I recompiled all that stuff I realized that stripping is explicitely disabled in configuration options and most likely is really done while 'debuginfo' packages are created. So I ended with tons of '.so' libraries unstripped and resulting binary packages are somewhat "fat" as I turned off for a time beeing this 'debuginfo'. Moral - don't do that. :-) Also recompilation takes quite a bit of time and a disk space. Just compilation messages amount to something of an order of 5.5 Megs in each case. Anyway - so far results work for me just fine where I had a chance to try and have fixes for these long lists of security problems. Michal From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 11 20:18:06 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:18:06 -0500 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was > received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo > that FC4 people can use with yum? > -- I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora-legacy list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? -- ======================================================================= The proof that IBM didn't invent the car is that it has a steering wheel and an accelerator instead of spurs and ropes, to be compatible with a horse. -- Jac Goudsmit ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Fri Aug 11 20:04:55 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:04:55 -0400 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <44DCE2E7.1090201@cs.ucsb.edu> Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > >> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was >> received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo >> that FC4 people can use with yum? >> -- >> > I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora-legacy > list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? > -- > Good question. I think the short answer is, there is a yum repo, but it's not quite ready or official yet. Plus, there are not yet any legacy updates for FC4. Anyway, there is a mirrorlist for released updates here: http://fedora.redhat.com/Download/mirrors/legacy-updates-released-fc4 Which currently only points to: http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/ -Jeff From jkosin at beta.intcomgrp.com Fri Aug 11 20:08:40 2006 From: jkosin at beta.intcomgrp.com (James Kosin) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:08:40 -0400 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <44DCE3C8.4090703@beta.intcomgrp.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: >> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was >> received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo >> that FC4 people can use with yum? >> -- > I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora-legacy > list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? (1) You posted in response to an announcement and not as a separate question. (2) Look here: http://www.fedoralegacy.org - -James -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE3OPIkNLDmnu1kSkRAg9sAJ9cgK38m/PVn3juUnpBvTEg9JocLACfTYub nvY3AaoCK4se29aBd0MAsMU= =hphX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Scanned by ClamAV - http://www.clamav.net From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 11 21:08:58 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:08:58 -0500 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <44DCE3C8.4090703@beta.intcomgrp.com> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> <44DCE3C8.4090703@beta.intcomgrp.com> Message-ID: <1155330538.3318.32.camel@vulcan> On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 16:08 -0400, James Kosin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Aaron Konstam wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > >> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was > >> received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo > >> that FC4 people can use with yum? > >> -- > > I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora-legacy > > list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? > (1) You posted in response to an announcement and not as a separate > question. > (2) Look here: http://www.fedoralegacy.org I looked at that web site and did not find nay answere to my question. If you think it exits on that web site, please tell me where? ======================================================================= Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 11 21:18:28 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:18:28 -0500 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <44DCE2E7.1090201@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> <44DCE2E7.1090201@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <1155331108.3318.41.camel@vulcan> On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 16:04 -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > Aaron Konstam wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > > > >> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was > >> received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy repo > >> that FC4 people can use with yum? > >> -- > >> > > I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora-legacy > > list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? > > -- > > > Good question. I think the short answer is, there is a yum repo, but > it's not quite ready or official yet. Plus, there are not yet any > legacy updates for FC4. > > Anyway, there is a mirrorlist for released updates here: > http://fedora.redhat.com/Download/mirrors/legacy-updates-released-fc4 > > Which currently only points to: > http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/ > > -Jeff Well that is almost right. It really points to: http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/$ARCH/ which when you fill in i386 for $ARCH it then goes to: fedora/4/updates/i386 Hopefully this will be straitened out in the near future. -- ======================================================================= Gravity: What you get when you eat too much and too fast. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Fri Aug 11 21:23:15 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:23:15 -0400 Subject: Legacy FC-4 branch created -one more time In-Reply-To: <1155331108.3318.41.camel@vulcan> References: <3237e4410608082009h2e6a7795k9bd6592e45b575f4@mail.gmail.com> <1155160520.2843.14.camel@vulcan> <1155327486.3318.2.camel@vulcan> <44DCE2E7.1090201@cs.ucsb.edu> <1155331108.3318.41.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <7A6558EB-DEEC-4873-BA3B-31B712F62544@cs.ucsb.edu> On Aug 11, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 16:04 -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: >> Aaron Konstam wrote: >>> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 16:55 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: >>> >>>> At the risk of showing my ignorance let me ask. The information was >>>> received that FC4 is moving to legacy control. Is there a legacy >>>> repo >>>> that FC4 people can use with yum? >>>> -- >>>> >>> I was told on the fedora-list to ask this question on the fedora- >>> legacy >>> list, so it did. Why is no answer forthcoming? >>> -- >>> >> Good question. I think the short answer is, there is a yum repo, but >> it's not quite ready or official yet. Plus, there are not yet any >> legacy updates for FC4. >> >> Anyway, there is a mirrorlist for released updates here: >> http://fedora.redhat.com/Download/mirrors/legacy-updates-released-fc4 >> >> Which currently only points to: >> http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/ >> >> -Jeff > Well that is almost right. It really points to: > http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/$ARCH/ > which when you fill in i386 for $ARCH it then goes to: > fedora/4/updates/i386 > Hopefully this will be straitened out in the near future. > Forgive me for not being more exact; I thought the /updates/ link without the ARCH would be more helpful to you and others. -Jeff From jkeating at j2solutions.net Sun Aug 13 01:20:31 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 21:20:31 -0400 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 Message-ID: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> The Fedora Legacy project has (finally (: ) released yum configs for Fedora Core 4. Currently there are no Fedora Legacy updates for 4, however the latest updates as released by the Fedora Project are available. You can pick up the config file from: http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ 65e477dda2e852ea5de37cae3ab7d64a2def6259 fedora/4/updates/SRPMS/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.src.rpm 48fd898e50a9c26d3cad870e9c92cd45d6cc1adf fedora/4/updates/i386/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm 48fd898e50a9c26d3cad870e9c92cd45d6cc1adf fedora/4/updates/x86_64/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm There were a number of updates in "Testing" for Fedora Core 4 at time of transition to Legacy. The Fedora Legacy Project will examine these and re-release them as updates-testing if they are security related in the days ahead. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 14 20:06:36 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:06:36 -0500 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <20060814150636.rt43yvlex4w0kkgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Jesse Keating : > You can pick up the config file from: > > http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ This page needs to be updated to reflect FC1 and FC2 being "retired"... -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 14 20:07:36 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:07:36 -0500 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <20060814150736.kg3s6aqizkco8sgo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Jesse Keating : > You can pick up the config file from: > > http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ Oh, and to add a link to FC4 also :) -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From jkeating at j2solutions.net Mon Aug 14 20:21:26 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:21:26 -0400 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <20060814150636.rt43yvlex4w0kkgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150636.rt43yvlex4w0kkgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <200608141621.26247.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Monday 14 August 2006 16:06, Eric Rostetter wrote: > This page needs to be updated to reflect FC1 and FC2 being "retired"... Whoops! Thanks for catching that. (I added the FC4 too) -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 14 21:08:57 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:08:57 -0500 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <20060814150736.kg3s6aqizkco8sgo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150736.kg3s6aqizkco8sgo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <1155589737.3908.33.camel@vulcan> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 15:07 -0500, Eric Rostetter wrote: > Quoting Jesse Keating : > > > You can pick up the config file from: > > > > http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ > > Oh, and to add a link to FC4 also :) > I must be the only incompetent on the list. Two things: 1. I find nothing related to FC4 on the website above. 2. I have no idea what the statement, "Oh, and to add a link to FC4 also" means. I keep- asking about this and I do not get an answer I can understand or use. Why is this? -- ======================================================================= Chicken Little was right. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net From jkeating at j2solutions.net Mon Aug 14 20:39:29 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:39:29 -0400 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <1155589737.3908.33.camel@vulcan> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150736.kg3s6aqizkco8sgo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <1155589737.3908.33.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <200608141639.29549.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Monday 14 August 2006 17:08, Aaron Konstam wrote: > I must be the only incompetent on the list. Two things: > 1. I find nothing related to FC4 on the website above. > 2. I have no idea what the statement, "Oh, and to add a link to FC4 > also" means. > > I keep- asking about this and I do not get an answer I can understand or > use. Why is this? I obviously didn't make it clear. http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ was the base URL 48fd898e50a9c26d3cad870e9c92cd45d6cc1adf fedora/4/updates/i386/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm was the rest of the URL with a sha1sum of the package. Put the two parts together: http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/i386/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm download it, use sha1sum to make sure it maches the listed sha1sum, and install it. I've fixed the site so that it mentions FC4, but I should have been a bit more clear. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkosin at beta.intcomgrp.com Mon Aug 14 20:43:19 2006 From: jkosin at beta.intcomgrp.com (James Kosin) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:43:19 -0400 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <200608141621.26247.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150636.rt43yvlex4w0kkgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200608141621.26247.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <44E0E067.2060701@beta.intcomgrp.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jesse Keating wrote: > On Monday 14 August 2006 16:06, Eric Rostetter wrote: >> This page needs to be updated to reflect FC1 and FC2 being "retired"... > > Whoops! Thanks for catching that. (I added the FC4 too) Jesse, I believe RH9 was retired many ages ago also. - -James -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE4OBmkNLDmnu1kSkRAjxfAJ9WuaH4sb5t6jS1MAugsxK69QXOEwCdEjks 77oXUzM25ghe8XFkrNVOTe8= =ng3U -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Scanned by ClamAV - http://www.clamav.net From jkeating at j2solutions.net Mon Aug 14 20:50:55 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:50:55 -0400 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <44E0E067.2060701@beta.intcomgrp.com> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <200608141621.26247.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44E0E067.2060701@beta.intcomgrp.com> Message-ID: <200608141650.55525.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Monday 14 August 2006 16:43, James Kosin wrote: > Jesse, > > ? I believe RH9 was retired many ages ago also. Not from the Fedora Legacy project. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 14 20:47:20 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:47:20 -0500 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <1155589737.3908.33.camel@vulcan> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150736.kg3s6aqizkco8sgo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <1155589737.3908.33.camel@vulcan> Message-ID: <20060814154720.u279pjoxhk848k8o@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Aaron Konstam : > I must be the only incompetent on the list. Two things: Nope. > 1. I find nothing related to FC4 on the website above. Try again, and use the "page refresh" button to make sure you have a recent copy. Or, just go to http://www.fedoralegacy.org/ and follow the links there. Both are very recent changes though. > 2. I have no idea what the statement, "Oh, and to add a link to FC4 > also" means. The page was out of date. It is now up-to-date. > I keep- asking about this and I do not get an answer I can understand or > use. Why is this? Because sometimes change takes time... It isn't that you are getting no answer or that changes are not being made; it's just that the changes and answers are sometimes slow to happen. -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 14 20:51:04 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:51:04 -0500 Subject: Yum config for Fedora Core 4 In-Reply-To: <44E0E067.2060701@beta.intcomgrp.com> References: <200608122120.35056.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20060814150636.rt43yvlex4w0kkgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200608141621.26247.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <44E0E067.2060701@beta.intcomgrp.com> Message-ID: <20060814155104.u71cdvjzjjko4wg4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting James Kosin : > I believe RH9 was retired many ages ago also. > > - -James Nope, see http://www.fedoralegacy.org/ for information on what is and is not retired by FL (and when RHL 9 will be retired). -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From akonstam at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 15 13:50:03 2006 From: akonstam at sbcglobal.net (Aaron Konstam) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 08:50:03 -0500 Subject: Fedora Core 4 Transferred to Fedora Legacy In-Reply-To: <44DCFCE0.80207@insight.rr.com> References: <20060807174308.GA22666@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1154984366.2750.12.camel@vulcan> <200608072230.20736.jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> <1155309948.3146.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44DCFCE0.80207@insight.rr.com> Message-ID: <1155649803.3115.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 17:55 -0400, Jim Cornette wrote: > Aaron Konstam wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 22:30 +0100, Chris Jones wrote: > >>> There is something I have forgotten or maybe I never really knew. How > >>> does the transfer of FC4 to the Legacy Project affect the ability to do > >>> a yum install or yum upgrade? > >> I cannot confirm how it got there, but in my /etc/yum.repos.d directory I have > >> a fedora-legacy.repo file which contains > >> > >> [legacy-updates] > >> name=Fedora Legacy $releasever - $basearch - Updates > >> mirrorlist=http://fedora.redhat.com/download/mirrors/legacy-updates-released-fc$releasever > >> enabled=0 > >> gpgcheck=1 > >> gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-legacy > >> > >> [legacy-testing] > >> name=Fedora Legacy $releasever - $basearch - Updates Testing > >> mirrorlist=http://fedora.redhat.com/download/mirrors/legacy-updates-testing-fc$releasever > >> enabled=0 > >> gpgcheck=1 > >> gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-legacy > >> > >> Is this what is needed to activate "legacy" support. > >> > >> I must say my box is FC5 so I haven't worried about it too much.. I have the > >> normal repos online and these legacy repos disabled. > >> > >> cheers Chris > >> > > Look, I can't get any any answer from the fedora-legacy-list on this so > > I guess I am invisible. The legacy-updates-testing-fc$releasever for FC4 > > does not exist and the one for FC5 exists bit is empty. So how does one > > get legacy updates? > > > > > > It looks like there are i386 updates at the below link. There is a > mirror list for ftp and http methods. > > ftp://ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/fedoralegacy/fedora/4/updates/i386 > > Jim > That is intersting except when you go to that site it wants you to logon. When I say I want togin anonomously I get back a message that content can not be displayed. Am I the only one that is driven to distraction by the fac that the fedora legacy repositories just don't exist or don't work. -- Aaron Konstam From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Aug 15 14:16:46 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:16:46 -0400 Subject: Fedora Core 4 Transferred to Fedora Legacy In-Reply-To: <1155649803.3115.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060807174308.GA22666@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <44DCFCE0.80207@insight.rr.com> <1155649803.3115.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200608151016.46487.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 15 August 2006 09:50, Aaron Konstam wrote: > That is intersting except when you go to that site it wants you to > logon. When I say I want togin anonomously I get back a message that > content can not be displayed. > > Am I the only one that is driven to distraction by the fac that the > fedora legacy > repositories just don't exist or don't work. I'm sorry Aaron, perhaps we haven't made it absolutely clear yet. The legacy-yumconf we provided a link to for you will install an extra repository into your yum setup. Currently the repository it points to is just as all of the released updates from Fedora thus far. Fedora Legacy has not ADDED any updates yet. You shouldn't have to touch anyother yum configs, leave them all enabled. You'll still be able to do yum installs and yum updates. When Legacy makes an update to Fedora Core 4, we will add it to the repository that our yumconf points to, and the next time you yum update you'll see that update. Is this clear yet? Can you please please please tell me if you're still unclear on something? I'm somewhat upset that you're telling people that we aren't responding to you, when in fact multiple people on this list are trying to help you. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Curtis at GreenKey.net Tue Aug 15 23:13:06 2006 From: Curtis at GreenKey.net (Curtis Doty) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:13:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Fedora Core 4 Transferred to Fedora Legacy In-Reply-To: <200608151016.46487.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <20060807174308.GA22666@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <44DCFCE0.80207@insight.rr.com> <1155649803.3115.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608151016.46487.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <200608152313.k7FND609001535@alopias.GreenKey.net> 10:16am Jesse Keating said: > legacy-yumconf we provided a link to for you will install an extra repository > into your yum setup. Currently the repository it points to is just as all of > the released updates from Fedora thus far. Fedora Legacy has not ADDED any > updates yet. You shouldn't have to touch anyother yum configs, leave them > all enabled. You'll still be able to do yum installs and yum updates. When > Legacy makes an update to Fedora Core 4, we will add it to the repository > that our yumconf points to, and the next time you yum update you'll see that > update. This makes perfect sense. And I was thinking... Having just done: # rpm -ivh http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/$HOSTTYPE/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm Which involved a bit of copy/paste to ensure I got the URL correct. Would it be possible in fc6 or fc7 to add the legacy-yumconf as an optional package in either core or extras? Then, in 2008 or whenever those core releases go to pasture, the transition could be as smooth as: # yum -y install legacy-yumconf ../C From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 15 23:48:35 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 05:18:35 +0530 Subject: Fedora Core 4 Transferred to Fedora Legacy In-Reply-To: <200608152313.k7FND609001535@alopias.GreenKey.net> References: <20060807174308.GA22666@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <44DCFCE0.80207@insight.rr.com> <1155649803.3115.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608151016.46487.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <200608152313.k7FND609001535@alopias.GreenKey.net> Message-ID: <44E25D53.1000403@fedoraproject.org> Curtis Doty wrote: > This makes perfect sense. And I was thinking... Having just done: > > # rpm -ivh http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/4/updates/$HOSTTYPE/legacy-yumconf-4-2.fc4.noarch.rpm > > Which involved a bit of copy/paste to ensure I got the URL correct. Would > it be possible in fc6 or fc7 to add the legacy-yumconf as an optional > package in either core or extras? Then, in 2008 or whenever those core > releases go to pasture, the transition could be as smooth as: > > # yum -y install legacy-yumconf > Fedora Core 5 already includes the fedora-legacy repository file. You just have to enable it. Rahul From hoodcanaljim at usa.com Sat Aug 19 01:51:18 2006 From: hoodcanaljim at usa.com (jim hamby) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 20:51:18 -0500 Subject: md5 errors Message-ID: <20060819015118.86D731024D@ws1-3.us4.outblaze.com> hello I just installed yum 1.0.3 on my rh 7.3 box. I execute "yum update" and receive.... Error: gpg key dosen't match for "tetex-latex and XFree*" Well I cured that with gpg=0 Now I get the following .... Error: MD5 Signature check failed for /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/tetex-latex-1.0.7-47.5.legacy.i386.rpm You may want to run yum clean or remove the file: /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/tetex-latex-1.0.7-47.5.legacy.i386.rpm Exiting. next I get ..... Error: MD5 Signature check failed for /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/XFree86-base-fonts-4.2.1-16.73.31.legacy.i386.rpm You may want to run yum clean or remove the file: /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/XFree86-base-fonts-4.2.1-16.73.31.legacy.i386.rpm Exiting. cat yum.conf [main] cachedir=/var/cache/yum debuglevel=2 logfile=/var/log/yum.log pkgpolicy=newest exactarch=1 exclude=kernel* [base] name=Red Hat Linux $releasever base baseurl=http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/$releasever/os/$basearch gpgcheck=0 [updates] name=Red Hat Linux $releasever updates baseurl=http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/$releasever/updates/$basearch gpgcheck=0 #[updates-testing] #name=Red Hat Linux $releasever updates-testing #baseurl=http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/$releasever/updates-testing/$basearch #gpgcheck=1 [legacy-utils] name=Fedora Legacy utilities for Red Hat Linux $releasever baseurl=http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/$releasever/legacy-utils/$basearch gpgcheck=0 I have run "clean" and deleted the file. Then yum downloads a new set of files and errors out again... when I reload the gpg keys again I get this .... # gpg --import /usr/share/doc/yum-1.0.3/*GPG-KEY gpg: key 8DF56D05: not changed gpg: key 731002FA: not changed gpg: key DB42A60E: not changed gpg: Total number processed: 3 gpg: unchanged: 3 # rpm -q gnupg python rpm rpm-python yum gnupg-1.0.7-7 python-1.5.2-43.73 rpm-4.0.4-7x.18 rpm-python-4.0.4-7x.18 yum-1.0.3-6.0.7.x.legacy openssl-0.9.6b-35.7 openssl-devel-0.9.6b-35.7 So what do I do now??? I followed the instructions on.... http://www.fedoralegacy.org/docs/yum-rh7x.php I can't find the files required by MD5 and don't know what to do?? I am totally lost Jim -- ___________________________________________________ Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/ From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Sat Aug 19 02:02:58 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:02:58 -0500 Subject: md5 errors In-Reply-To: <20060819015118.86D731024D@ws1-3.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20060819015118.86D731024D@ws1-3.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <20060818210258.i7lsebhtuejo0cco@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting jim hamby : > Error: gpg key dosen't match for "tetex-latex and XFree*" > > Well I cured that with gpg=0 Yeah, or import the correct keys. It could be the Fedora Legacy Key, or the Red Hat key. Or it could be a red herring, and the keys are fine, but the downloaded files are corrupted. > Now I get the following .... > > Error: MD5 Signature check failed for > /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/tetex-latex-1.0.7-47.5.legacy.i386.rpm > You may want to run yum clean or remove the file: > /var/cache/yum/updates/packages/tetex-latex-1.0.7-47.5.legacy.i386.rpm > Exiting. Usually this means there was either a network problem downloading the files, or a disk problem on your machine such as quota, disk full, etc. Check that your /var and/or / partition isn't full (after you get the message). > I am totally lost Confirm that it isn't a disk space issue first, as that is the most likely problem. Once you answer that, we can move on to other ideas if needed. > Jim -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From hoodcanaljim at usa.com Sat Aug 19 23:59:43 2006 From: hoodcanaljim at usa.com (jim hamby) Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 18:59:43 -0500 Subject: md5 errors Message-ID: <20060819235943.442DC47808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> Bingo df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/hda5 372M 101M 252M 29% / /dev/hda2 46M 14M 29M 31% /boot /dev/hda3 5.0G 87M 4.6G 2% /home none 22M 0 22M 0% /dev/shm /dev/hdb2 5.8G 823M 4.7G 15% /usr /dev/hda6 251M 246M 0 100% /var ***************** Thanks Eric I'll try putting a link in at /var/cache/yum/updates/packages >> to /home/packages or something like that. > Confirm that it isn't a disk space issue first, as that is the > most likely problem. Once you answer that, we can move on to > other ideas if needed. -- ___________________________________________________ Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/ From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Sun Aug 20 10:58:05 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 06:58:05 -0400 Subject: md5 errors In-Reply-To: <20060819235943.442DC47808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20060819235943.442DC47808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <0FFA5AD4-2EE5-4C91-9326-4AED472F7F9D@cs.ucsb.edu> Yeah, that's an itsy-bitsy /var partition. If the symlink doesn't work, I'd go for a bind mount in /etc/fstab. /home/yum /var/cache/yum/ ext3 bind 0 0 (or something like that) Good luck :) Also, you are aware that Fedora Legacy is stopping its support of RH 7.3 soon, correct? -Jeff On Aug 19, 2006, at 7:59 PM, jim hamby wrote: > Bingo > > df -h > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/hda5 372M 101M 252M 29% / > /dev/hda2 46M 14M 29M 31% /boot > /dev/hda3 5.0G 87M 4.6G 2% /home > none 22M 0 22M 0% /dev/shm > /dev/hdb2 5.8G 823M 4.7G 15% /usr > /dev/hda6 251M 246M 0 100% /var ***************** > > Thanks Eric > > I'll try putting a link in at /var/cache/yum/updates/packages >> > to /home/packages > or something like that. > >> Confirm that it isn't a disk space issue first, as that is the >> most likely problem. Once you answer that, we can move on to >> other ideas if needed. > > > > -- > ___________________________________________________ > Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/ > > > -- > fedora-legacy-list mailing list > fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list From Oisin.Curtin at PhoenixFltOps.com Sun Aug 20 20:33:17 2006 From: Oisin.Curtin at PhoenixFltOps.com (Oisin Curtin) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:33:17 -0400 Subject: md5 errors In-Reply-To: <0FFA5AD4-2EE5-4C91-9326-4AED472F7F9D@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <20060819235943.442DC47808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> <0FFA5AD4-2EE5-4C91-9326-4AED472F7F9D@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <44E8C70D.4000408@PhoenixFltOps.com> Nine point four gigs free disk space not a byte in var! Happiness is one file system. Jeff Sheltren wrote: > Yeah, that's an itsy-bitsy /var partition. If the symlink doesn't > work, I'd go for a bind mount in /etc/fstab. > > /home/yum /var/cache/yum/ ext3 bind 0 0 > > (or something like that) > > Good luck :) > > Also, you are aware that Fedora Legacy is stopping its support of RH > 7.3 soon, correct? > > -Jeff > > On Aug 19, 2006, at 7:59 PM, jim hamby wrote: > >> Bingo >> >> df -h >> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >> /dev/hda5 372M 101M 252M 29% / >> /dev/hda2 46M 14M 29M 31% /boot >> /dev/hda3 5.0G 87M 4.6G 2% /home >> none 22M 0 22M 0% /dev/shm >> /dev/hdb2 5.8G 823M 4.7G 15% /usr >> /dev/hda6 251M 246M 0 100% /var ***************** >> >> Thanks Eric >> >> I'll try putting a link in at /var/cache/yum/updates/packages >> to >> /home/packages >> or something like that. >> >>> Confirm that it isn't a disk space issue first, as that is the >>> most likely problem. Once you answer that, we can move on to >>> other ideas if needed. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ___________________________________________________ >> Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/ >> >> >> -- >> fedora-legacy-list mailing list >> fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list > > > -- > fedora-legacy-list mailing list > fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list > From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 21 02:58:47 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:58:47 -0500 Subject: md5 errors In-Reply-To: <0FFA5AD4-2EE5-4C91-9326-4AED472F7F9D@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <20060819235943.442DC47808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> <0FFA5AD4-2EE5-4C91-9326-4AED472F7F9D@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <20060820215847.ttodpgi8g2w4ocgs@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Jeff Sheltren : > Yeah, that's an itsy-bitsy /var partition. If the symlink doesn't > work, I'd go for a bind mount in /etc/fstab. Doesn't 7.3 yum support the "cachedir" variable in yum.conf, ala: [main] cachedir=/home/cache/yum If so that would be much easier... -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From hoodcanaljim at usa.com Mon Aug 21 16:35:05 2006 From: hoodcanaljim at usa.com (jim hamby) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:35:05 -0500 Subject: md5 errors Message-ID: <20060821163505.EF8161F50B1@ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com> > > Also, you are aware that Fedora Legacy is stopping its support of > RH 7.3 soon, correct? Well that frosts the cake! Guess its time to up grade the machine and operating system. Most of the machines in my network are running CentOS 4.2. The link at the /var/yum level to /home/yum worked and the system was updated. -- ___________________________________________________ Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/ From michal at harddata.com Fri Aug 25 16:23:53 2006 From: michal at harddata.com (Michal Jaegermann) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:23:53 -0600 Subject: ImageMagick and FC4 Message-ID: <20060825162353.GA23224@mail.harddata.com> Source rpm for FC4 version of ImageMagick with recent security patches added is available at ftp://ftp.harddata.com/pub/Legacy_srpms/ImageMagick-6.2.2.0-3.fc4.2.1.mj.src.rpm This was a simple case as patches, extracted from FC5 updates, were for 6.2.2 in the first place. :-) Michal From josh at wavefood.com Mon Aug 28 06:04:27 2006 From: josh at wavefood.com (Joshua Andrews) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:04:27 -0700 Subject: apache logging problems Message-ID: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> I upgraded my redhat 6.2 - 7.0 boxes to redhat 9 and now I am having a strange thing happen with apache logging. My virtual hosts log to their own separate locations, and it has worked fine this way for years, but now, sometimes after the Sunday 4:02 AM restart there is no more logging (combined log or error log), for the virtual servers and I have to stop and restart apache to get logging working again. The logs are rotated properly and there are new files created which are writable but no entries are made. Any ideas what is going wrong? Thanks, -Joshua From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Aug 28 16:10:54 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:10:54 -0500 Subject: apache logging problems In-Reply-To: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> References: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> Message-ID: <20060828111054.n34izoy9jzks0oo4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Joshua Andrews : > now, sometimes after the Sunday 4:02 AM restart there is no more > logging (combined log or error log), for the virtual servers and I have > to stop and restart apache to get logging working again. The logs are > rotated properly and there are new files created which are writable but > no entries are made. Apache isn't seeing that the files have been rotated, and is still writing to the old files. > Any ideas what is going wrong? Fix your logrotate scripts. Probably need a postrotate line to restart apache, maybe even some other options.... Maybe something like: /var/log/httpd/*log { missingok notifempty sharedscripts compress delaycompress postrotate /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || true endscript } The "compress" and "delaycompress" are optional (i.e. only if you want the logs compressed). Of course, instead of kill -HUP you could use /etc/init.d/httpd or /usr/sbin/apachectl directly to restart the web server... > Thanks, > -Joshua -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From josh at wavefood.com Tue Aug 29 01:25:25 2006 From: josh at wavefood.com (Joshua Andrews) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:25:25 -0700 Subject: apache logging problems In-Reply-To: <20060828111054.n34izoy9jzks0oo4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> <20060828111054.n34izoy9jzks0oo4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <44F39785.7070209@wavefood.com> Eric Rostetter wrote: > > Apache isn't seeing that the files have been rotated, and is still > writing to the old files. > > Fix your logrotate scripts. Probably need a postrotate line to > restart apache, maybe even some other options.... Maybe something > like: > > /var/log/httpd/*log { > missingok > notifempty > sharedscripts > compress > delaycompress > postrotate > /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> > /dev/null || true endscript > } > > The "compress" and "delaycompress" are optional (i.e. only if you want > the > logs compressed). > > Of course, instead of kill -HUP you could use /etc/init.d/httpd or > /usr/sbin/apachectl directly to restart the web server... Thanks, The httpd logrotate script was much as you wrote it out but there are so many entries because of the virtualhost logging that I have consolidated them all into one expression; /var/log/httpd/access_log /var/log/httpd/any_log etc... { missingok postrotate /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || true endscript } I am thinking that restarting httpd so many times as I had logs may be the problem. Thank you for the response, it helps getting another view. -Joshua From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Tue Aug 29 02:05:45 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 21:05:45 -0500 Subject: apache logging problems In-Reply-To: <44F39785.7070209@wavefood.com> References: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> <20060828111054.n34izoy9jzks0oo4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <44F39785.7070209@wavefood.com> Message-ID: <20060828210545.2tmkismt5jkcg8c4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Joshua Andrews : > The httpd logrotate script was much as you wrote it out but there are > so many entries because of the virtualhost logging that I have > consolidated them all into one expression; > > /var/log/httpd/access_log /var/log/httpd/any_log etc... { > missingok > postrotate > /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || true > endscript > } You left out the "sharedscripts" option. > I am thinking that restarting httpd so many times as I had logs may be > the problem. Unless you use the "sharedscripts" option as I showed, it will still restart it for each log file listed. The "sharedscripts" option tells it to only run the script once after rotating all the logs.... > Thank you for the response, it helps getting another view. > -Joshua No problem. -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From josh at wavefood.com Tue Aug 29 02:47:11 2006 From: josh at wavefood.com (Joshua Andrews) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:47:11 -0700 Subject: apache logging problems In-Reply-To: <20060828210545.2tmkismt5jkcg8c4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <44F2876B.3020500@wavefood.com> <20060828111054.n34izoy9jzks0oo4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <44F39785.7070209@wavefood.com> <20060828210545.2tmkismt5jkcg8c4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <44F3AAAF.6010804@wavefood.com> Eric Rostetter wrote: > Quoting Joshua Andrews : > >> The httpd logrotate script was much as you wrote it out but there are >> so many entries because of the virtualhost logging that I have >> consolidated them all into one expression; >> >> /var/log/httpd/access_log /var/log/httpd/any_log etc... { >> missingok >> postrotate >> /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || true >> endscript >> } > > You left out the "sharedscripts" option. > >> I am thinking that restarting httpd so many times as I had logs may be >> the problem. > > Unless you use the "sharedscripts" option as I showed, it will still > restart it for each log file listed. The "sharedscripts" option tells > it to only run the script once after rotating all the logs.... Cool man, that is exactly what I did not understand how to do! Next Sunday will be the true test of course. Thanks a lot. -Joshua From deisenst at gtw.net Tue Aug 29 10:09:16 2006 From: deisenst at gtw.net (David Eisenstein) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 05:09:16 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Seamonkey for FedoraLegacy releases? Message-ID: Was just pondering all the mess of Mozilla versus Seamonkey, and the scores of vulnerabilities in Mozilla/Firefox/Thunderbird that we in Legacy haven't done much with in awhile. Red Hat Enterprise Linux has ended up producing a Seamonkey (for RHEL 2.1, RHEL 3, and RHEL 4) that supersedes Mozilla-1.7.13, since the Mozilla Foundation no longer supports their namesake browser. Should we in Legacy go forth and do likewise, so things like Epiphany (that depends on pieces of Mozilla to run) can run safely? If so -- any suggestions of coordination with Fedora Extras since they are currently the maintainers of Seamonkey for FC4/FC5/FC(rawhide)? FC3 too? Thorsten - does something like this need to be run by the Extras Steering Committee? Kai - any thoughts/ideas? Would you like to work with Legacy to get Seamonkey to replace Mozilla? Thanks. -David From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Aug 29 12:28:11 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:28:11 -0400 Subject: Seamonkey for FedoraLegacy releases? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200608290828.11596.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 06:09, David Eisenstein wrote: > Should we in Legacy go forth and do likewise, so things like Epiphany > (that depends on pieces of Mozilla to run) can run safely? Yes. > If so -- any suggestions of coordination with Fedora Extras since they are > currently the maintainers of Seamonkey for FC4/FC5/FC(rawhide)? ?FC3 too? Their version of seamonkey is designed to install in line with existing mozilla and not replace it. We need to actually replace seamonkey so it needs to be packaged differently. > Thorsten - does something like this need to be run by the Extras Steering > Committee? > > Kai - any thoughts/ideas? ?Would you like to work with Legacy to get > Seamonkey to replace Mozilla? Extras has decided to have the FC3 / 4 buildroots configured to pull content from Legacy, so theoretically we should remove Seamonkey from the Extras repo once we have it properly packaged in the Legacy repos. Extras packages can continue to build against it at that point. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kengert at redhat.com Tue Aug 29 19:12:32 2006 From: kengert at redhat.com (Kai Engert) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:12:32 +0200 Subject: Seamonkey for FedoraLegacy releases? In-Reply-To: <44F46D44.7020201@leemhuis.info> References: <44F46D44.7020201@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <44F491A0.10701@redhat.com> CC'ing Chris who worked on Mozilla/SeaMonkey packages, in case he wants to raise any issues. I personally do not have any objections with your plan to release SeaMonkey for Legacy Fedora distributions. If you are able to provide SeaMonkey packages that replace Mozilla while depending software still works, fine with me. One thing that comes to my mind is localization. I think for SeaMonkey we only have English and German, while Mozilla might have had more languages? Thanks in advance for your work on this. Kai Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi All! > > David Eisenstein schrieb: > >> Was just pondering all the mess of Mozilla versus Seamonkey, and the >> scores of vulnerabilities in Mozilla/Firefox/Thunderbird that we in >> Legacy haven't done much with in awhile. >> >> Red Hat Enterprise Linux has ended up producing a Seamonkey (for RHEL >> 2.1, RHEL 3, and RHEL 4) that supersedes Mozilla-1.7.13, since the >> Mozilla Foundation no longer supports their namesake browser. >> >> Should we in Legacy go forth and do likewise, so things like Epiphany >> (that depends on pieces of Mozilla to run) can run safely? >> > > Sound like a good plan to me. > > >> If so -- any suggestions of coordination with Fedora Extras since they >> are currently the maintainers of Seamonkey for FC4/FC5/FC(rawhide)? FC3 >> too? >> > > "Just make it work and don't step on anybodys toes if you don't have to" > should be mostly enough for me. Maybe a announcement and/or discussion > on fedora-extras-list/fedora-maintaienr might be a good idea. > > >> Thorsten - does something like this need to be run by the Extras >> Steering Committee? >> > > Well, we got informed -- that should also be mostly enough afaics. I > forwarded your mail to the private FESCo list for comments one hour ago > and received some comments already: > --- > I'd like to hear what Kai has to say. My initial opinion is that it's > fine, as long as it's communicated clearly and the seamonkey package(s) > completely replace the mozilla package(s). > --- > +1, from my own testing, seamonkey does replace mozilla just fine, > end-user-wise anyway. > --- > The Extras SeaMonkey maintainers are the ones that should be in on the > discussion. FESCo could oversee things to make sure there are no > conflicts but replacing Mozilla with Seamonkey will be a good thing > security-wise so it's really a question of whether the SeaMonkey > maintainers have any objections. If so, FESCo can help ensure they are > addressed. > --- > > CU > thl > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3248 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: