Experience with ATRPMS repository?
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Tue Dec 7 00:55:14 UTC 2004
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 05:27:03PM -0500, A1tmblwd at netscape.net wrote:
> What has your experience been using the ATRPMS, http://atrpms.net , repository?
> Mine has not been very favorable. I regret creating atrpms.repo and adding it
> to the /etc/yum.repo.d/ directory.
> BEGIN VENT
> Here are the problems that plague my FC3 system after I used "yum update":
> 1. lm_sensors-2.8.7-2 was replaced with a buggy lm_sensors.i386 2.8.8-0_35.rhfc3.at.
No, as explained in the bug report your config is buggy, when you ask
for lm_sensors to start w/o configuring it. lm_sensors did not self-activate.
> I discovered that when I rebooted my system and encountered a "cannot access
> procfs/sysfs" error message. I restored the older lm_sensors rpm file and posted
> a bug report #329. As of this posting rhgb still has does not work but I have not
> implemented the steps to fix problem 3 and replace/repair upgraded packages.
Your rhgb issues will most certainly be unrelated to both lm_sensors
> 2. yum-2.1.11-3 was replaced by yum.noarch-2.1.12-43.rhfc3.at. The install overwrote
> the existing yum.conf file. Not very nice. Should not happen. Another bug
> report #330. Axel Thimms comments and says that he finds no fault with his script.
Not "his script", but the tagging of configuration files. If something
is tagged %config(noreplace) then it passes the information to rpm and
rpm does what it's got to do. If you had manual changes and rpm
blasted your config files, then that would have been a severe
regression of rpm proper, but I don't believe that this is the
case. You should still report this to the rpm developers, if you think
the bug is there.
> 3. "0check4updates" was inserted into /etc/cron.d/cron.daily without my
> permission or awareness. It runs a script to update APT and YUM. Bug report #331.
> "locate check4updates" yielded three hits. No hits using "rpm -q check4updates".
> A little googling for "0check4updates" pointed me to
> http://download.atrpms.net/production/sources/common/atrpms/atrpms.spec. Leading
> me to try:
> # rpm -q atrpms
> # rpm -e atrpms
> error: Failed dependencies:
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) perl-XML-Parser-2.34-5_2.rhfc3.at.i386
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) perl-HTML-Parser-3.36-0_2.rhfc3.at.i386
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) perl-XML-Twig-3.15-0_8.rhfc3.at.noarch
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) perl-XML-LibXML-1.58-2.rhfc3.at.i386
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) razor-agents-2.61-7.rhfc3.at.i386
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) perl-IO-Socket-SSL-0.95-1.rhfc3.at.noarch
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is needed by (installed) spamassassin-3.0.1-0_19.rhfc3.at.i386
> Man, this guy really wants to keep his code installed. The
> atrpms-perl-module-helper is dug in so deep yum lists 56 other
> packages must be removed to clear the dependencies.
Please, not that FUD again. Since you like googling, check the
discussion on site vs vendor vs perl directories. You'll find lots of
Debian related parts, which equally apply to Red Hat/Fedora.
Bottom line is, you need the versioned site dir at the top of the
search path, otherwise perl modules under the site dir may not be
seeing the proper modules.
> Why did he sneak check4updates into the atrpms-61-1.at package?
What makes you think check4updates wasn't in the atrpms package from
the beginning more than two years ago? What's so conspirative of a
method deployed also under up2date and yum under different names?
check4updates is just a notifier for apt/yum on new packages. And it
is tunable by simple settings under /etc/sysconfig/check4updates.
> It is certainly not required for the proper operation of yum or
> I believe that I have just encountered my first Linux trojan!
> I am definitely not happy about the turn of events. Axel has
> commented on bugs 330 and 331. He has not commented on 329. In each
> of his comments he finds no fault with his code. Sigh. Programmer's
> My advice stay well away if you know what is good for your system.
It is sad to see someone quite clueless (which is not something to be
ashamed of, everyone is doing his first steps once) to jump to
conclusions and shout out wrong advices to others. Sorry to say, but
your post doesn't really contribute in any constructive way. You are
frustrated because your system hangs on rhgb and you try to find a
Nevertheless the bug reports (even though these were invalid) are
welcome. Better an invalid report too much than missing important
> END VENT
> Peace and joy!
> Kam Leo
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20041207/fd7481da/attachment-0002.bin
More information about the users