test2 via rawhide
by Lars G
hello
i checked the redhat ftp and some mirrors and most of them already have the
test2 release files, fine.
my question is when do the test2 packages propagate to the rawhide channel
because i noticed that the packages from the test2 (severn) folder are newer than the
ones in rawhide. (rawhide-release is from 23-09)
lars
20 years, 8 months
gnome 2.4 - beta 2 - upgrading from beta 1 and RH 9
by Frank Merenda
> > My next question is 'where's gnome 2.4'? How do I
> get
> > it?
>
> in beta2
>
> -sv
I thought you were going to say that. :) Thanks for
the information - I do appreciate it.
Ok, here's the next question.
if I have beta 1 installed, can I
apt-get dist-upgrade
to beta 2? If so, do I have to change anything in my
sources.list?
Second question. On my main laptop I am running RedHat
9. Is there any way to upgrade via apt-get? Or do I
have to download the ISO's and install? I'm on a
dialup, and would like to apt-get dist-upgrade from 9
if possible.
Thanks in advance!
=====
- Frank Merenda
Author - Uptime - http://www.steidler.net/uptime/
-a community based Linux blog and newsletter-
Registered Linux User #234428 - http://counter.li.org
webmaster - Humane Society of Jackson County - http://www.hsjc.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
20 years, 8 months
still unclear about updates versus rawhide
by Robert P. J. Day
i still haven't seen a definitive explanation about the distinction
between "rawhide" and beta "updates." are these technically one and the
same?
from fedora.redhat.com, "As developers build packages to fix bugs or
implement new features, the packages are placed in Red Hat Rawhide..."
historically, i always thought that "updates" were highly-recommended
patches, to fix bugs or apply security updates. in short, those were the
sorts of things that were pretty clearly *guaranteed* to be in the next
release.
rawhide, OTOH, was for new and improved packages that were still
noticeably leading edge, perhaps uncomfortably so in some cases, and while
they almost always supplied more functionality than the current packages,
there was no guarantee that they would end up in the next release.
so, officially, how does one stay up to date with the soon-to-be-
released beta? just keep applying rawhide on a regular basis? or what?
rday
20 years, 8 months
There do should have different between up2date and Rawhide?
by 肇 鑫
Hello, everyone.
I have an question. There do should have different between up2date and
Rawhide?
My answer is no. However, the fact now seems different.
What makes me think of it is as below.
1)I use up2date to update my Severn everyday. I aslo subcribe the two
Severn Channel, Beta and Beta Updates
2)However, since the Fedora announce date,Sep. 22ed, until now, Sep. 26th,
I notice my up2date tells me there is nothing to update.
3)As I said above, I use up2date everyday, so I feel more and more strange
about that. Then I go to
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/i386/RedHat/RPMS to see if my
Severn is updated.
4)I use rpm -q to check. I checked to package: up2date and XFree86, which I
think is the most frequently updated. The result are as below.
[hutigers@www hutigers]$ rpm -q up2date
up2date-3.9.28-2
[hutigers@www hutigers]$ rpm -q XFree86
XFree86-4.3.0-32
However, what I find in
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/i386/RedHat/RPMS now is
up2date-3.9.29-2.i386.rpm and XFree86-4.3.0-33.i386.rpm, which are newer.
5)Then I go to https://rhn.redhat.com/ and http://fedora.redhat.com/ to
check if there is something changed.
6)In https://rhn.redhat.com/ I find "Mailman RPM does not properly handle
package installation and upgrade." And I notice it has bugs on upgrade.
7)In http://fedora.redhat.com/ I find nothing newer than Sep 22ed. then I
go to http://fedora.redhat.com/download/#errata, where I find the below
message.
AA:**Check for Updates**
BB:**If you downloaded a beta, check Rawhide for updated packages or the
RHN beta channel using the Red Hat Update Agent (up2date).**
CC:**If you downloaded a final release, check for Errata via Red Hat
Network or from the Errata website.**
Notice the BB section. It says "check Rawhide for updated packages or the
RHN beta channel using the Red Hat Update Agent (up2date)". That makes me
believe that two methods you do will come to the same result.
However, it is not. In https://ren.redhat.com/ you can find up2date is just
as follows
up2date-3.9.28-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.26-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.25-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.24-1 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.23-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.20-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.19-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.15-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.13-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.9.12-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates
up2date-3.1.46-2 Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta
And in
rawhide,ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/i386/RedHat/RPMS,
up2date is now up2date-3.9.29-2.i386.rpm.
So now rawhide is newer than update channels
8 and final) After the long discussion, my question is that. Is that a
mistake make the two different? I mean that the two should be the same. Or
in fact the rawhide should be newer than the update channel, as it is more
unstable than update channel?
If the second answer is yes, please tell me a way to update with rawhide
automaticly.
Thanks you all too read this long page and best regards.
:)
hutigers
Sep. 26th, 2003
_________________________________________________________________
享用世界上最大的电子邮件系统― MSN Hotmail。 http://www.hotmail.com
20 years, 8 months
First problems with Fedora Core
by Gerry Tool
Install went well.
Up2date froze during first-boot while trying to register with RHN.
Reboot restarted first-boot OK and up2date completed to finding there
was no channel available for this system yet.
Evolution has frozen multiple times - almost anytime I try to change
something like adding this account or moving the subject field to the
left of the from field. Have to kill all evolution processes to
recover.
Attempts to reboot before killing errant evolution processes failed
until I did a Ctrl-Alt-Backspace.
RHN icon is 1 pixel wide.
Any confirmation of these findings from others? If so, I will bugzilla
them.
Thanks.
Gerry Tool
20 years, 8 months
how do enable these TCP ports for Bittorrent?
by Elton Woo
Allow incoming TCP 6881 - 6889 to join the torrent swarm.
http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/
I thought this might be a good time to try using / learn to use
Bittorrent. The red hat 9 rpm pacakage is already installed,
but I don't know if /how to enable the above ports.
If I go to security settings, I *know* that just saying TCP
is a trusted device will open all ports.
.... I guess this is something else I ought have learned to
do <*blush*> so feel free to rap me on the knuckles if
I'm asking a stupid / annoying question!
Elton ;-)
--
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_4504.html
"You only live once: let's make life BETTER for each other."
LINUX User #193975 [AMD ATHLON CPU] ICQ #149608718.
20 years, 8 months
Homebrew Severn ISOs
by David W. Aquilina
Greetings all,
I'm attempting to create some custom Severn ISOs (mainly to include a
kickstart file and such) however I'm running into some problems that I
never saw when doing the same with RHL 9.0.
The CD created from the custom ISO boots without a problem, however the
installer complains that "The Red Hat Linux CD was not found in any of
your CDROM drives".
I created the CD by copying the contents of the first Severn CD to a
directory, making my modifications, and then creating the ISO via this
command:
"mkisofs -r -T -J -V "Custom Severn Disk 1 of 3" -b images/bootdisk.img
-o CustomSevern1.iso /CD1"
(/CD1 being the path to the directory)
This process worked just fine for Shrike (Red Hat Linux 9).
Any thoughts?
Thanks!
--
David Aquilina
20 years, 8 months
Re: Test 2 Release Communication
by DAVID BALAZIC
"Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm(a)redhat.com> wrote :
>
>On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 11:07:12AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>> 1) mailing lists, and their specific mandates, and
>
>No change beyond what we did last week. What specific
>questions do you have here?
>
>> 2) how to report bugs
>
>Bugzilla will have "Fedora Core" as product, "test2" as version.
Continuing the trend of ambigous versions ?
What do you have against "9.0.94" or "9.0.94beta" ?
Regards
--
David Balazic
20 years, 8 months
