[PlanetCCRMA] Re: Re: fc5 repo (was fc3...?)

[Fernando Lopez-Lezcano]

On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 15:00 -0700, Jonathan Segel wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Segel <jsegel@magneticmotorworks.com
> > On Sep 15, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> >>
> >>> which ones should i
> >>> use for normal operation within planetccrma?
> >>>
> >>> the planetccrma.repo contains planetcore, planetextras, planetos,
> >>> planetupdates.
> >>
> >> By default planetos and planetupdates are disabled in the
> >> planetccrma.repo file (expecting that the normal mirrored  
> >> repositories
> >> in the standard files would be there). Change that to "enable=1" for
> >> both and gsl should be picked up all right. Or readd the other
> >> files...
> >
> > this seems to cause some problems. enable=1 on both planetos and
> > planet-extras, yum update wants to download another 702MB of stuff.
> > ok, then, i'm way out of date.
> > but... it also wants to remove kernel
> > 2.6.16-1.2080.13.rrt.rhfc5.ccrma  plus it's alsa module EVEN THOUGH /
> > etc/yum.conf has the line oldpackage=1
> 
> 
> i'm still finding this awkward. enabling planetos and planetextras in  
> the planetccrma.repo brings in the 2.6.17-1.2174_FC5 kernel, and  
> erases 2.6.16-1.2080.16.rrt.rhfc5.ccrma. 

Sorry you are hitting more problems. 

That means most probably you have not disabled the additional yum module
that only keeps the latest two kernels (and erases the rest - there are
instructions in the web page on how to disable that). Or maybe something
else that I have not yet experienced. 

> i am assuming the new fc5 kernel isn't patched? this is with 
> oldpackage=1 in yum.conf.

Yes, the regular fc5 kernel does not have the realtime patches. In
addition to oldpackage=1 you need to disable the "keep only two kernels"
feature. Even then some users have experienced problems with the yum
dependency resolution - in this particular case yum sucks... (I'm also
assuming that the yum you have is the Planet CCRMA one, not the original
Fedora Core yum). 

As recommended by others I probably have to rename my kernels to
"kernel-realtime-*" or something like that so that there is no
possibility of conflict with the standard kernels. I have not found a
minute to do that yet. 

-- Fernando