12:39 p.m.
I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
told today to use:
# rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
:-)
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
10:08 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:13 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
OK. The book Maximum RPM does not even mention rpmbuild. For this
function I think the early work was done with amanda. I expect most of
rpmbuild is in amanda but not easy to check.
What does drive backup software (amanda) have to do with RPM?
--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
4:13 p.m.
Karl Larsen wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>> My opinion is the book is just as good today as it was 10 years
>> ago. The updates have been to solve bugs and make the code better at
>> doing what it does. And the way to make a rpm file has not changed
>> in 10 years.
>
> Does the book cover the split in functionality between the rpm and
> rpmbuild programs that happened some time ago? 'man' will show what
> each does now.
>
> Also, you really want to understand 'yum' before trying to do much
> with the lower level rpm commands. If you are trying to install
> something that exists in a yum-compatible repository, you should use
> yum instead of touching rpm directly, and if you are building rpms
> yourself for more than one machine you'll probably want to put them
> in a yum repository that all machines can access.
>
Well I know from reading man yum that it uses rpm and if there is a
problem with rpm then yum errors out. We see that a lot on this list.
I will check the book on rpmbuild programs and see what they and check
that with the man page.
OK. The book Maximum RPM does not even mention rpmbuild. For this
function I think the early work was done with amanda. I expect most of
rpmbuild is in amanda but not easy to check.
It does talk to moving your rpm building to your own non-root
directories and I have been using this before a lot.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
10:08 a.m.
Andrew Kelly wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 13:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>
>> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's still available now:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
>>>>
>>>>
>>> given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
>>> i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
>>> the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
>>>
>>> rday
>>>
>>>
>> I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
>> make a book of that was written this month
>>
> i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
> here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
> now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
> rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
> aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
> that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
> it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
> everything that's happened with rpm since then.
>
> similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
> your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
> error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
> who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
>
> how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
>
> rday
>
That, right there, is the best damn reading I've done in more'n'a
fortnight! Brilliant!
It's a bit unfortunate that it was Karl and not somebody else, 'cuz
there'll be a bunch swelling up and running to defences and whatnot and
the whole beauty of it will be lost. But, we can't script life, can
we...
Regardless of whose feelings may or may not be hurt, or whose shiny
armour will now be donned and brought to the frey, (or for that matter
the contents of the dozens of posts I still have yet to read), that was
a fantastic and wholly accurate vignette.
Just lovely.
And for what it's worth, the book is indeed rather aged, but the package
building side of rpm hasn't really changed so much as to make the book a
bad idea. I still thumb through mine occasionally, in fact, and was
really stoked to be able to download an e-version yesterday.
Actually, my thanks go to Karl for making me aware of its existence.
Andy
This thread stsrted when I was told about using #rpm -q
--whatprovides (full file name) to get Nvidia out of init. It worked
fine. Then I looked it up in my printed out Maximum RPM and there it was
just as expected.
Then we talked about getting the book and another person found it
still available on the Red Hat web. Then rday said the book is no good
because it is too old and that rpm has been updated many times in the
past 10 years.
My opinion is the book is just as good today as it was 10 years ago.
The updates have been to solve bugs and make the code better at doing
what it does. And the way to make a rpm file has not changed in 10 years.
So if your interested in rpm you MUST d/l the PDF version of the
book Maximum RPM. If your an old college Prof you print it into a paper
book. As someone said, a man page might be great but if your computer
will not start you can't read it :-)
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
1:56 p.m.
Michael Schwendt wrote:
There's still the newer community edition, which has been
extended and
corrected since 2000:
http://rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/
Note that it is not the same as this:
http://rpm.org/max-rpm/
Is this available as a pdf file? Sitting with a laptop on my lap
just doesn't have the same look-and-feel as treeware. Besides, when I
make notes on the margin of my screen, the sections they reference keep
getting lost when I scroll..
Cheers,
Gordon Keehn
1:59 a.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
[snip]
> p.s. if people are still actively working on that book, why not make it
> part of the fedoraproject docs collection, as in:
>
> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/en/
rpm.org says there is a "Fedora RPM Guide" in the fedora docs project. I
couldn't find a link from the fedoraproject.org site, though (perhaps
because it is still a draft?)
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/drafts/rpm-guide-en/
This is an excellent book whose name unfortunately suggests it's somehow
specific to Fedora (it isn't really). It's also available in print for
those who prefer reading on the bus under the name of Red Hat RPM Guide
(http://www.amazon.com/Red-Hat-Guide-Eric-Foster-Johnson/dp/0764549650).
Very much recommended over the severely outdated Maximum RPM.
- Panu -
2:45 p.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
[snip]
p.s. if people are still actively working on that book, why not make
it
part of the fedoraproject docs collection, as in:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/en/
rpm.org says there is a "Fedora RPM Guide" in the fedora docs project. I
couldn't find a link from the fedoraproject.org site, though (perhaps
because it is still a draft?)
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/drafts/rpm-guide-en/
There was also a dead-tree packaging book that came out in the FC2 to FC3
time frame. I own a copy, but haven't read it, and the name escapes me at
the moment. I don't know if it was related to the above or not.
--
William Hooper
2:40 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 13:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
> > > It's still available now:
> > >
> > > http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
> > >
> >
> > given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
> > i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
> > the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
> >
> > rday
> >
> I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
> make a book of that was written this month
i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
everything that's happened with rpm since then.
similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
----
could we bit a bit more mean spirited today?
Craig
2:35 p.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
p.s. if people are still actively working on that book, why not make
it part of the fedoraproject docs collection, as in:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/en/
There is a different draft at
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/drafts/rpm-guide-en/
Someone needs to volunteer to maintain it. If you are interested, join
the docs team.
Rahul
2:08 p.m.
on 10/31/2007 2:56 PM, Gordon Keehn wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> There's still the newer community edition, which has been extended and
> corrected since 2000:
> http://rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/
>
> Note that it is not the same as this:
> http://rpm.org/max-rpm/
>
>
Is this available as a pdf file? Sitting with a laptop on my lap
just doesn't have the same look-and-feel as treeware. Besides, when I
make notes on the margin of my screen, the sections they reference keep
getting lost when I scroll..
:-)
--
David
2:02 p.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Gordon Keehn wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> There's still the newer community edition, which has been extended and
> corrected since 2000:
> http://rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/
>
> Note that it is not the same as this:
> http://rpm.org/max-rpm/
>
Is this available as a pdf file? Sitting with a laptop on my lap
just doesn't have the same look-and-feel as treeware. Besides, when
I make notes on the margin of my screen, the sections they reference
keep getting lost when I scroll..
also, how up to date *is* it, given that the copyright on the first
page still reads "2000"?
rday
p.s. if people are still actively working on that book, why not make
it part of the fedoraproject docs collection, as in:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/en/
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
1:30 p.m.
On 31/10/2007, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> It's still available now:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000, i'd
suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all the
rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
There's still the newer community edition, which has been extended and
corrected since 2000:
http://rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/
Note that it is not the same as this:
http://rpm.org/max-rpm/
1:25 p.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
>>
>>> It's still available now:
>>>
>>> http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
>>>
>>>
>> given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
>> i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
>> the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
>>
>> rday
>>
>>
> I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
> make a book of that was written this month
>
i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
everything that's happened with rpm since then.
similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
Tell you what rday, if I didn't know better I would guess your age at 8 or 9 years.
You are without doubt the most "full of yourself" person I have ever known.
Every time I write something you find it a driving force to write
your drivel that says well it is too old or to poorly written for me to
read or you can't spend the time because you have so much important work
to do.
Why don't you do that important work and leave what I write alone?
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
12:54 p.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
> > It's still available now:
> >
> > http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
> >
>
> given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
> i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
> the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
>
> rday
>
I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
make a book of that was written this month
i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
everything that's happened with rpm since then.
similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
10:51 a.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
Karl Larsen wrote:
[snip]
>> And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
>> book that you could print?
>>
>> Andy
>>
> Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
> of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey worked
> there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
It's still available now:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000, i'd
suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all the
rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
9:53 a.m.
Karl Larsen wrote:
[snip]
> And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of
that
> book that you could print?
>
> Andy
>
Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey worked
there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
It's still available now:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
--
William Hooper
8:39 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 07:07 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
Andrew Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 06:24 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
> [referring to Maximum RPM, E.C.Baily]
>
>
>> I though I was just old and used to books. I recall how happy I was
>> to find that book and be able to print it. It is in a big 3 ring binder
>> and up in the book shelf. Easy to find. But it does help to read it. And
>> it is NOT a good book :-)
>>
>
> Nonsense, it's a fine book. But it is actually more geared toward those
> who want to build rpm packages and not to Joe Blow, who just wants to
> install something or do a simply db query. That kind of info is much
> more readily available in the man pages.
>
>
> And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
> book that you could print?
>
> Andy
>
>
>> --
>>
>> Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
>> Linux User
>> #450462 http://counter.li.org.
>>
>>
>
>
Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey
worked there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
I've got one. Cost me half a butt-load of money, too.
I'm not at all sorry I spent the money, now, but, truth be told, if I'd
have had access to an electronic version back then, I would have taken
it instead.
Andy
8:07 a.m.
Andrew Kelly wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 06:24 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
[referring to Maximum RPM, E.C.Baily]
> I though I was just old and used to books. I recall how happy I was
> to find that book and be able to print it. It is in a big 3 ring binder
> and up in the book shelf. Easy to find. But it does help to read it. And
> it is NOT a good book :-)
>
Nonsense, it's a fine book. But it is actually more geared toward those
who want to build rpm packages and not to Joe Blow, who just wants to
install something or do a simply db query. That kind of info is much
more readily available in the man pages.
And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
book that you could print?
Andy
> --
>
> Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
> Linux User
> #450462 http://counter.li.org.
>
>
Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey
worked there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
8:07 a.m.
Andrew Kelly wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 15:13 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Dave Burns wrote:
>
>> On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
>>> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
>>> told today to use:
>>>
>>> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
>>> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>>>
>>> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
>>> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
>>> :-)
> If you learn to read man pages you don't need so many books. They are a
> lot faster to read, too.
But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the park
near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the waiting room at
the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they just aren't as bloody
"sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they? :-)
If you carry a laptop, you can have them all much more portably than a
big stack of paper books and easier to search.
And, as this list and certain of its members have indeed quite recently
shown, not every man page is written in a way that Joe Lunchbox can
readily assimilate. Heck, let's be blunt here. Some of them are
remarkably poorly written.
That's why I said 'learn to read' them. It wasn't an insult - it isn't
easy. They all assume that you already know everything the shell will
do to your commands before the program in question even starts; many
assume you already know what a lot of other man pages say. But once you
do know those things you don't want to read them again every time.
That said, I'm not in complete disagreement with you, Les. RTFM
is even
today completely apropos and should be the mantra of everybody who's
chosen to be part of the Linux experience. But don't knock a book,
Maestro. It kind of pisses us scribblers off.
Tutorial styles are OK but you only need them once. After you know
_what_ a program does you want a concise reference instead. Books
should split the sections so you don't have to wade through pages and
pages of tutorial when all you want to find is one option setting.
Andy
(Every try to loan a great man page to a friend?)
Better to be even more concise there and give them the one line command
they are looking for.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
7:44 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 06:24 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
[referring to Maximum RPM, E.C.Baily]
I though I was just old and used to books. I recall how happy I
was
to find that book and be able to print it. It is in a big 3 ring binder
and up in the book shelf. Easy to find. But it does help to read it. And
it is NOT a good book :-)
Nonsense, it's a fine book. But it is actually more geared toward those
who want to build rpm packages and not to Joe Blow, who just wants to
install something or do a simply db query. That kind of info is much
more readily available in the man pages.
And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
book that you could print?
Andy
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
7:24 a.m.
Andrew Kelly wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 15:13 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Dave Burns wrote:
>
>
>> On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
>>> told today to use:
>>>
>>> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
>>> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>>>
>>> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
>>> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
>>> :-)
>>>
> If you learn to read man pages you don't need so many books. They are a
> lot faster to read, too.
>
But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the park
near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the waiting room at
the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they just aren't as bloody
"sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they? :-)
And, as this list and certain of its members have indeed quite recently
shown, not every man page is written in a way that Joe Lunchbox can
readily assimilate. Heck, let's be blunt here. Some of them are
remarkably poorly written.
That said, I'm not in complete disagreement with you, Les. RTFM is even
today completely apropos and should be the mantra of everybody who's
chosen to be part of the Linux experience. But don't knock a book,
Maestro. It kind of pisses us scribblers off.
;-)
Andy
(Every try to loan a great man page to a friend?)
I though I was just old and used to books. I recall how happy I was
to find that book and be able to print it. It is in a big 3 ring binder
and up in the book shelf. Easy to find. But it does help to read it. And
it is NOT a good book :-)
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
4:40 a.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 09:47 +0100, Andrew Kelly wrote:
> But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the
> park near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the
> waiting room at the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they
> just aren't as bloody "sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they?
> :-)
Not to mention that you can read a book while the computer isn't
working, in an effort to make it work again.
perhaps slightly off-topic but, when it comes to books, i'm a big fan
of this approach:
http://sagehill.net/book-description.html
my favourite reference for docbook and XSL processing. readable
online for free, or throw a few dollars at the author and buy the real
thing. i wish more books were available that way.
rday
p.s. DISCLAIMER: i was an informal reviewer of the early editions,
so my name shows up in the acknowledgements. but i have no financial
interest whatsoever in that book. i just really like it.
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
4:28 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 09:47 +0100, Andrew Kelly wrote:
But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the
park near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the waiting
room at the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they just aren't
as bloody "sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they? :-)
Not to mention that you can read a book while the computer isn't
working, in an effort to make it work again.
And, as this list and certain of its members have indeed quite
recently shown, not every man page is written in a way that Joe
Lunchbox can readily assimilate. Heck, let's be blunt here. Some of
them are remarkably poorly written.
My first foray into Linux wasn't too successful. I bought a traditional
two-inch thick book, and worked my way through the problem using it as
my guide. It had some man page printouts, but was mostly instructive
texts, with some examples and in-depth explanations of those examples.
I got a working system, then proceeded into running a DNS server,
integrating it with a DHCP server, and so on and so forth.
It was also good for curing insomnia. I used to read the NASA articles
featured in the Electronics Australia magazine for that, but the
magazine went out of print quite some time ago. ;-)
(Every try to loan a great man page to a friend?)
Gotta find one first... I'll let you work out whether I'm referring to
a friend or a great man page. ;-)
--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
3:47 a.m.
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 15:13 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Dave Burns wrote:
> On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
>> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
>> told today to use:
>>
>> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
>> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>>
>> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
>> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
>> :-)
If you learn to read man pages you don't need so many books. They are a
lot faster to read, too.
But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the park
near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the waiting room at
the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they just aren't as bloody
"sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they? :-)
And, as this list and certain of its members have indeed quite recently
shown, not every man page is written in a way that Joe Lunchbox can
readily assimilate. Heck, let's be blunt here. Some of them are
remarkably poorly written.
That said, I'm not in complete disagreement with you, Les. RTFM is even
today completely apropos and should be the mantra of everybody who's
chosen to be part of the Linux experience. But don't knock a book,
Maestro. It kind of pisses us scribblers off.
;-)
Andy
(Every try to loan a great man page to a friend?)
3:13 p.m.
Dave Burns wrote:
On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
> told today to use:
>
> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>
> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
> :-)
If you learn to read man pages you don't need so many books. They are a
lot faster to read, too.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
1:49 p.m.
Dave Burns wrote:
rpm -qf would also tell you that for a file:
$ rpm -q --whatprovides /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
openssh-server-4.5p1-6.fc7
$ rpm -qf /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
openssh-server-4.5p1-6.fc7
--whatprovides is actually more general, it will also tell you what
provides a "capability":
$ rpm -q --whatprovides httpd
httpd-2.2.6-1.fc7
Apparently a rpm can specify a dependency on a capability when any one
of several packages can provide the needed functionality. I am not
able to find the place in the man page where "capability" is defined
or described, but it must be in there somewhere, right?
@)
Dave
On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
> told today to use:
>
> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>
> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
> :-)
>
>
> --
>
> Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
> Linux User
> #450462 http://counter.li.org.
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
>
Yes I saw that rpm -qf was close to what I used. I have no idea what
capability the longer whatprovides provides either. If your need is to
delete something then your about half done. when you try rpm -e filename
you get a batch of dependent rpm names to deal with. And that takes
experience.
Karl
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
1:48 p.m.
Karl Larsen wrote:
I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
told
today to use:
# rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability. I
have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
:-)
yum can do the same thing, and has the advantage it will also tell you
about rpms you don't have installed, but are available in one of your
configured repos
yum whatprovides /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
<snip>
openssh-server.i386 4.3p2-4.cern installed
Matched from:
/etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
<snip>
Chris
1:35 p.m.
rpm -qf would also tell you that for a file:
$ rpm -q --whatprovides /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
openssh-server-4.5p1-6.fc7
$ rpm -qf /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd
openssh-server-4.5p1-6.fc7
--whatprovides is actually more general, it will also tell you what
provides a "capability":
$ rpm -q --whatprovides httpd
httpd-2.2.6-1.fc7
Apparently a rpm can specify a dependency on a capability when any one
of several packages can provide the needed functionality. I am not
able to find the place in the man page where "capability" is defined
or described, but it must be in there somewhere, right?
@)
Dave
On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
told today to use:
# rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
:-)
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
8:07 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 13:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
> > > It's still available now:
> > >
> > > http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
> > >
> >
> > given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
> > i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
> > the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
> >
> > rday
> >
> I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
> make a book of that was written this month
i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
everything that's happened with rpm since then.
similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
rday
That, right there, is the best damn reading I've done in more'n'a
fortnight! Brilliant!
It's a bit unfortunate that it was Karl and not somebody else, 'cuz
there'll be a bunch swelling up and running to defences and whatnot and
the whole beauty of it will be lost. But, we can't script life, can
we...
Regardless of whose feelings may or may not be hurt, or whose shiny
armour will now be donned and brought to the frey, (or for that matter
the contents of the dozens of posts I still have yet to read), that was
a fantastic and wholly accurate vignette.
Just lovely.
And for what it's worth, the book is indeed rather aged, but the package
building side of rpm hasn't really changed so much as to make the book a
bad idea. I still thumb through mine occasionally, in fact, and was
really stoked to be able to download an e-version yesterday.
Actually, my thanks go to Karl for making me aware of its existence.
Andy
12:28 p.m.
Andrew Kelly wrote:
And for what it's worth, the book is indeed rather aged, but the package
building side of rpm hasn't really changed so much as to make the book a
bad idea. I still thumb through mine occasionally, in fact, and was
really stoked to be able to download an e-version yesterday.
Actually, my thanks go to Karl for making me aware of its existence.
Andy
You just have to be careful about a few changes in .spec file
format, and the fact that rpmbuild was split from rpm. One change
that comes to mind is the change from Copyright: to License:. I
believe there were some changes in the default build macros as well,
but I am not sure. Was the -F (freshen) option part of RPM when the
book was written? I am trying to remember when it was added.
I also have vague memories about changes in librpm along the way,
but they do not impact the rpm user interface to the libraries.
Mikkel
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
12:20 p.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
everything that's happened with rpm since then.
similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
rday
You say it much better then I could. But try not to chase Karl away
- his posts are usually good for a laugh. ;-)
Mikkel
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
11:20 a.m.
On Thursday November 1 2007 5:18:42 am Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> Someone needs to volunteer to maintain it. If you are
> interested, join the docs team.
>
> Rahul
heh ... in my copious free time.
kill several birds at once - take a timeout from all your
endlessly self righteous postings about Karl's posts and write a
better doc
your blood pressure would go down by ceasing to have the time to
be annoyed by Karl
we'd all benefit from your vast experience
the list would quieten down
oh, well --- time to wake up from my nap now....
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
10:19 a.m.
Karl Larsen wrote:
My opinion is the book is just as good today as it was 10 years
ago.
The updates have been to solve bugs and make the code better at doing
what it does. And the way to make a rpm file has not changed in 10 years.
Does the book cover the split in functionality between the rpm and
rpmbuild programs that happened some time ago? 'man' will show what each
does now.
Also, you really want to understand 'yum' before trying to do much with
the lower level rpm commands. If you are trying to install something
that exists in a yum-compatible repository, you should use yum instead
of touching rpm directly, and if you are building rpms yourself for more
than one machine you'll probably want to put them in a yum repository
that all machines can access.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
4:18 a.m.
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> p.s. if people are still actively working on that book, why not make
> it part of the fedoraproject docs collection, as in:
>
> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/en/
There is a different draft at
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/drafts/rpm-guide-en/
Someone needs to volunteer to maintain it. If you are interested,
join the docs team.
Rahul
heh ... in my copious free time. :-) but it would be nice if there
was a document somewhere covering all of the fedora-available software
management tools in addition to yum as well -- pup, pirut, synaptic
and so on. does such a thing exist in a single location?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
8:06 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 14:07 +0100, Andrew Kelly wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 13:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
> > Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
>
> > > > It's still available now:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
> > > >
> > >
> > > given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
> > > i'd suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all
> > > the rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
> > >
> > > rday
> > >
> > I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
> > make a book of that was written this month
>
> i'll tell you what, karl. things will go much more smoothly around
> here if we have a clearly-defined separation of responsibilities.
> now, in *my* case, having been around fedora for years, having used
> rpm for quite some time, and having actually *owned* the
> aforementioned book in treeware form, it will be *my* job to recommend
> that it might not be worth the time or money to get into it given that
> it's seven years old and almost certainly out of date, given
> everything that's happened with rpm since then.
>
> similarly, it will be *your* responsibility to do stupid things to
> your system, complain when it breaks, then offer to write worthless,
> error-filled "tutorials" that will almost certainly inspire readers
> who take you seriously to cause untold damage to their computers.
>
> how about it, karl? are you good with that? does that work for you?
>
> rday
That, right there, is the best damn reading I've done in more'n'a
fortnight! Brilliant!
It's a bit unfortunate that it was Karl and not somebody else, 'cuz
there'll be a bunch swelling up and running to defences and whatnot and
the whole beauty of it will be lost. But, we can't script life, can
we...
Regardless of whose feelings may or may not be hurt, or whose shiny
armour will now be donned and brought to the frey, (or for that matter
the contents of the dozens of posts I still have yet to read), that was
a fantastic and wholly accurate vignette.
Just lovely.
And for what it's worth, the book is indeed rather aged, but the package
building side of rpm hasn't really changed so much as to make the book a
bad idea. I still thumb through mine occasionally, in fact, and was
really stoked to be able to download an e-version yesterday.
Actually, my thanks go to Karl for making me aware of its existence.
Andy
Much as both of you have suggested to Karl, Please go generate a blog
for your bashing. It adds nothing to the list, makes you look childish
and doesn't help anyone. Great Blog material.
regards,
LesH
1:53 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 12:25 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
Why don't you do that important work and leave what I write
alone?
Possibly because you were the one provoking in this case...
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000,
i'd
suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all the
rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
And he wasn't even replying to you. It's perfectly valid and useful to
point out that a book is probably out of date. Nevertheless, you felt it
necessary to reply...
Karl Larsen wrote:
I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
make a book of that was written this month
Which from my reading is a bit haughty, and definitely confrontational.
Robert nowhere suggested that there even existed a more up-to-date
resource; he only warned that the book being discussed likely contained
some outdated information. He took offense, rightly or wrongly, and
stepped it up. But it should be noted for the record that you started
this. You could have left what he wrote alone, but you didn't. His
addition elevated the technical merit of the thread; yours did not.
1:51 p.m.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Karl Larsen wrote:
Every time I write something you find it a driving force to write
your drivel that says well it is too old or to poorly written for me
to read or you can't spend the time because you have so much
important work to do.
Why don't you do that important work and leave what I write
alone?
because, you perpetually insufferable twit, if you look at my original
post on the RPM book, you'll notice i wasn't replying to *you*, i was
replying to william hooper's reference to the original RPM book, and
simply giving my opinion on whether, after this many years, it was
worth reading anymore.
seriously, karl, are you really this freaking stupid, or do you just
*play* a moron on the intertubes?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
10:09 a.m.
William Hooper wrote:
Karl Larsen wrote:
[snip]
>> And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
>> book that you could print?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
> Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
> of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey worked
> there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
>
It's still available now:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
By the way, it is there and the pdf will let you print it. The book
is long so suggest you print first odd and then even on the second pass.
Works very well.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
12:39 p.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, William Hooper wrote:
> Karl Larsen wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>> And by the way, when and where did you find an electronic copy of that
>>> book that you could print?
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>> Not sure where but it was about 1998 or 9 and not sure what Version
>> of Red Hat. It must have been on the Rad Hat web page since Bailey worked
>> there. He did produce a printed book but it didn't sell well.
>>
> It's still available now:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/books/max-rpm/
>
given that that book appears to have not been updated since 2000, i'd
suggest that it doesn't have much value these days, given all the
rpm-related developments that have happened since then.
rday
I take rday you know of a newer book in pdf form that we can all
make a book of that was written this month
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
6 a.m.
On 30/10/2007, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
Yes I saw that rpm -qf was close to what I used. I have no idea what
capability the longer whatprovides provides either.
It is simple. "rpm -qf" is short for "rpm --query --file" and can
only
be used to query the package that contains the given _file_.
On the contrary, "rpm --query --whatprovides" searches all installed
packages in order to find which packages provides the given
_capability_. That "capability" can be anything from a file path, a
package name, to a descriptive symbol, which is used in inter-package
dependencies (e.g. but not limited to low-level library sonames, API
features and versions, virtual package names). You can examine package
capabilities with the "rpm --query --provides PKGNAMEHERE" query.
12:55 p.m.
on 10/30/2007 1:39 PM, Karl Larsen wrote:
I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
told today to use:
# rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
:-)
Do you prefer printed manuals? If so I have just the thing for you. It
will make, from 'man' pages, a readable, printable, text file. While
loaded into your favorite text editor you can search it if you like.
Find the bash script mancon.
I would post it here but I do not know if there would be objections. It is
about 1/2 k in size.
--
David
1:52 p.m.
Les Mikesell wrote:
Karl Larsen wrote:
> My opinion is the book is just as good today as it was 10 years
> ago. The updates have been to solve bugs and make the code better at
> doing what it does. And the way to make a rpm file has not changed in
> 10 years.
Does the book cover the split in functionality between the rpm and
rpmbuild programs that happened some time ago? 'man' will show what
each does now.
Also, you really want to understand 'yum' before trying to do much
with the lower level rpm commands. If you are trying to install
something that exists in a yum-compatible repository, you should use
yum instead of touching rpm directly, and if you are building rpms
yourself for more than one machine you'll probably want to put them in
a yum repository that all machines can access.
Well I know from reading man yum that it uses rpm and if there is a
problem with rpm then yum errors out. We see that a lot on this list. I
will check the book on rpmbuild programs and see what they and check
that with the man page.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
8:52 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 08:07 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Andrew Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 15:13 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Dave Burns wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/30/07, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com> wrote:
>>>> I printed out Maximum RPM in 1997 and I refer to it often. I was
>>>> told today to use:
>>>>
>>>> # rpm -q --whatprovides (complete direction to a file) and it did
>>>> provide the name of the file that provides /etc/rc.d/init.d/nvideo.
>>>>
>>>> Then just now I got to page 51 and there it listed this capability.
>>>> I have had this capability for 8 years but didn't know it...
>>>> :-)
>> If you learn to read man pages you don't need so many books. They are a
>> lot faster to read, too.
>
> But a lot less convenient on the bus (train, plane, toilet, in the park
> near the lake, on the couch during commercials, in the waiting room at
> the doctor's office, etc and so forth). And they just aren't as bloody
> "sexy" as a nicely printed book, are they? :-)
If you carry a laptop, you can have them all much more portably than a
big stack of paper books and easier to search.
I do carry a laptop. It doesn't like sand or spilled beer very much. And
it's heavy. And.... aw heck, I'm not going to get into the paper vs
needs-a-battery fight. Each side has their preferences; each option has
its merits.
>
> And, as this list and certain of its members have indeed quite recently
> shown, not every man page is written in a way that Joe Lunchbox can
> readily assimilate. Heck, let's be blunt here. Some of them are
> remarkably poorly written.
That's why I said 'learn to read' them. It wasn't an insult - it
isn't
easy. They all assume that you already know everything the shell will
do to your commands before the program in question even starts; many
assume you already know what a lot of other man pages say. But once you
do know those things you don't want to read them again every time.
> That said, I'm not in complete disagreement with you, Les. RTFM is even
> today completely apropos and should be the mantra of everybody who's
> chosen to be part of the Linux experience. But don't knock a book,
> Maestro. It kind of pisses us scribblers off.
Tutorial styles are OK but you only need them once. After you know
_what_ a program does you want a concise reference instead.
You mean like the "in a nutshell" series? Or even better, the "pocket
reference"?
Books
should split the sections so you don't have to wade through pages and
pages of tutorial when all you want to find is one option setting.
Good ones do. Have a scan at O'Reilly's "Programming Perl".
> Andy
>
> (Every try to loan a great man page to a friend?)
Better to be even more concise there and give them the one line command
they are looking for.
Again, this list and "one or more of its members" have proven that to be
often less than the best choice.
But we're digressing.
A man page isn't better than a book.
A book isn't better than a man page.
They both have their niches, and they both are sound resources excepting
the obvious caveats.
The only other comment I'd make on the topic of "dead trees" vs "needs
batteries" would be, every IT reference work should be sold with an
accompanying electronic version. Yes, I prefer a proper, paper book. But
Yes, I very often want to grep the things.
Andy
2:22 a.m.
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Maybe someone can fill in the dates?
rpm - both package management and package building functions
rpmbuild split off from rpm - rpm still accepts build options for
backwards compatibility, but calls rpmbuild to do the work.
rpm no longer recognizes the build options.
i would have thought the rpm changelog would have mentioned that:
$ rpm -q --changelog rpm
but that log simply stops back in dec of 2004. how odd. and i'm sure
that split was already well-established by that time.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
2:09 a.m.
Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:13 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
> OK. The book Maximum RPM does not even mention rpmbuild. For this
> function I think the early work was done with amanda. I expect most of
> rpmbuild is in amanda but not easy to check.
What does drive backup software (amanda) have to do with RPM?
Offhand, I would say he completely missed where rpmbuild came from.
Given when the book was written, I suspect that the functions of rpm
and rpmbuild were still combined in the rpm program. I don't
remember for sure, but I think that librpm was split off of the
original rpm program... I do know that rpm was ported to other
operating systems.
Maybe someone can fill in the dates?
rpm - both package management and package building functions
rpmbuild split off from rpm - rpm still accepts build options for
backwards compatibility, but calls rpmbuild to do the work.
rpm no longer recognizes the build options.
You could consider the rpm executable to be a CLI front end for
librpm. I have not checked, but I would think that yum uses Python
bindings to librpm, rather then running rpm itself. Both rpm and
buildrpm are normally are dynamically linked to librpm, though you
may find a statically linked version on install and rescue CDs.
(Handy if you manage to break rpm, and need to re-install packages.)
Mikkel
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
7:17 a.m.
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 05:55 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
Tim wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:13 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>> OK. The book Maximum RPM does not even mention rpmbuild. For this
>> function I think the early work was done with amanda. I expect most of
>> rpmbuild is in amanda but not easy to check.
>>
>
> What does drive backup software (amanda) have to do with RPM?
>
>
It is used in the making of rpm files. I didn't read it with care.
But it is in Maximum RPM.
[BEEEP!] Wrong answer.
It is NOT used in the making of rpm files. The Amanda application was
used to provide an example of creating a (more complicated) package.
The first appearance of "Amanda" (page 276 of the printed book, page 367
of the pdf book) is:
"So, without further ado, let's meet amanda..."
a statement preceded by the paragraph:
"In this chapter, we’ll package a more complex application that will
call on most of RPM’s capabilities. We’ll start with a general overview
of the application and end with a completed package, just as you would
if you were tasked with packaging an application that you’d not seen
before."
Please, Karl, attempt to be a bit less Authoritative when you are
clearly talking through your shirt-sleeve.
Andy
6:55 a.m.
Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:13 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
> OK. The book Maximum RPM does not even mention rpmbuild. For this
> function I think the early work was done with amanda. I expect most of
> rpmbuild is in amanda but not easy to check.
>
What does drive backup software (amanda) have to do with RPM?
It is used in the making of rpm files. I didn't read it with care.
But it is in Maximum RPM.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
4:30 a.m.
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 18:06 -0700, Les wrote:
Much as both of you have suggested to Karl, Please go generate a
blog
for your bashing. It adds nothing to the list, makes you look childish
and doesn't help anyone. Great Blog material.
regards,
LesH
I suggested no such thing, you must be remembering incorrectly.
As one could expect, I pretty much disagree with your assessments. But I
entirely accept your chastisement. A bit over the top (and the clatter
of ancient tin is hard to overhear), but absolutely warranted.
Andy
6017
days inactive
6020
days old
48 comments
18 participants
participants (18)
-
Alan M. Evans -
Andrew Kelly -
Chris Jones -
Claude Jones -
Craig White -
Dave Burns -
David -
Gordon Keehn -
Howard Howell -
Karl Larsen -
Les Mikesell -
Michael Schwendt -
Mikkel -
Panu Matilainen -
Rahul Sundaram -
Robert P. J. Day -
Tim -
William Hooper