[PlanetCCRMA] Re: latest kernel rocks

[Axel Thimm]

On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 02:57:48PM -0400, William M. Quarles wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> >On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:56:18PM -0400, William M. Quarles wrote:
> >>Axel Thimm wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 11:40:01AM -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> >>>>On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 11:18, Mark Knecht wrote:
> >>>>>On 28 Mar 2005 10:53:23 -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
> >>>>><nando at ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 18:39, no spam wrote:
> >>>>>>>yes i am a newbee and have fc3 discs of 11/2004 install, but
> >>>>>>>no up2date stuff lets me get 2.6.11 kernel...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>That won't happen, Planet CCRMA does not support up2date. Do
> >>>>>>you have a Planet CCRMA kernel already installed? You need to
> >>>>>>use apt to install and/or upgrade Planet CCRMA stuff... see
> >>>>>>the instructions in the web site.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>PlLase clarify for me if you have a moment. I can still use
> >>>>>Up2date for things like Mozilla, etc., correct? I'm having a
> >>>>>problem with Up3date on 3 systems here for the last week or so.
> >>>>
> >>>>Yes, of course you can keep using up2date, it is just that Planet CCRMA
> >>>>stuff will not appear there as updates or new installs.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>You can add something like
> >>>
> >>>apt ccrma http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/apt fedora/3/i386 
> >>>planetcore planetccrma
> >>>
> >>>to /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources and up2date will use ccrma! :)
> >>
> >>No it won't.  Spurious errors about file conflicts that don't
> >>exist.  It has already been reported as a bug.
> >
> >
> >Where? I searched these archives and looked at bugzilla.atrpms.net
> >(which isn't really used by ccrma users, it should be used more)
> >
> >Anyway the mechanism is there, if it's buggy, it's another
> >question. :)
> 

> It doesn't seem to be a problem with all repositories, but there are
> simply some yum and apt repositories that work perfectly well with
> up2date and others that don't.  Nobody has come up with an
> explanation as to why yet.

up2date (and yum) are known to be buggy in lots of aspects.

> If you can figure out why Fernando's (and others') repositories
> don't work and yours do, I think the Fedora Project community would
> be in a lot of debt to you.

> Maybe they will finally listen to you about Fedora Extras. ;-)

Listen to what? My concerns and suggestions are on Fedora Core, I've
given up on fedora.us two years ago ...

On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:04:24PM -0400, William M. Quarles wrote:
> Actually Axel, I just checked one of these bugs to see if there had been 
> any updates yet, and it seems that you participated in one of these 
> discussions, too.  So I guess that you are familiar with the problem.

Not really, and I didn't find myself in any of the four bugs you quoted.

> Anyway, they obviously aren't paying much attention to these bugs, 
> otherwise the developer in charge would have linked them together by now 
> and said that one depends on the other or that they are duplicates. 
> He's just letting them hang.

The long term strategy is to let up2date die and replace it with
something else (like a graphical yum, or smart if it matures fast
enough).
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/attachments/20050403/f91483bd/attachment.sig>