Re: Fedora FAQ and Jpackage

David Fischer (DHL US) wrote:
> I know I have asked this in the past but it is getting really hard to do
> a JPackage only fedora when all the version numbers are screwed up. Can
> you use JPackage and Fedora packages together with out any problems?? or
> do I have to stay in this hell???

It really screws up when the release tags don't match up, particularly
for beta releases of software. Then, the older Fedora versions (of some
maven2 packages, for instance) are always seen as newer than JPackage by
rpm, even though, in reality, it is the JPackage packages which are newer.

But, this was likely Fedora's intention, and they don't care insofar as
they knew that following their own guidelines would put a further rift
between themselves and JPackage and they have advised in the past not to
mix, anyway.

So, as far as rpm is concerned, some packages would need to be
downgraded, and this is only possible if yum supports preferring one
repository over another, regardless of version. I know `apt' on
Debian/Ubuntu can do this (with the `priority' feature), but I haven't
seen a similar feature in rpm-based tool.

--

-- 
Sincerely,

David Walluck
<david@...>

Re: Fedora FAQ and Jpackage

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 19:41 -0400, David Walluck wrote:
> David Fischer (DHL US) wrote:
> > I know I have asked this in the past but it is getting really hard to do
> > a JPackage only fedora when all the version numbers are screwed up. Can
> > you use JPackage and Fedora packages together with out any problems?? or
> > do I have to stay in this hell???
> 
> It really screws up when the release tags don't match up, particularly
> for beta releases of software. Then, the older Fedora versions (of some
> maven2 packages, for instance) are always seen as newer than JPackage by
> rpm, even though, in reality, it is the JPackage packages which are newer.
> 
> But, this was likely Fedora's intention, and they don't care insofar as
> they knew that following their own guidelines would put a further rift
> between themselves and JPackage and they have advised in the past not to
> mix, anyway.
> 
> So, as far as rpm is concerned, some packages would need to be
> downgraded, and this is only possible if yum supports preferring one
> repository over another, regardless of version. I know `apt' on
> Debian/Ubuntu can do this (with the `priority' feature), but I haven't
> seen a similar feature in rpm-based tool.
> 
there is a priority feature in yum to do this but it is not easily
configured.

--

-- 
David R. Fischer
Sr Systems Support Engineer
DHL Information Services (Americas)

Re: Fedora FAQ and Jpackage

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 13:48 -0400, Vivek Lakshmanan wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 08:36 -0700, David Fischer (DHL US) wrote:
> > Is there a FAQ on what packages from the fedora side and jpackage side
> > can be used together?
> > 
> > I know I have asked this in the past but it is getting really hard to do
> > a JPackage only fedora when all the version numbers are screwed up. Can
> > you use JPackage and Fedora packages together with out any problems?? or
> > do I have to stay in this hell???
> 
> This is a little Fedora centric so not 100% sure if this is the ideal
> location to ask this, anyway, there is a packaging policy in place:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/JPackagePolicy
> that is being adhered to at least since F-7 meant exactly to avoid this
> problem. If you find that fedora packages are violating this policy then
> please open bugs against them.
> 
> Thanks,
> Vivek
> 

The biggest conflict that I've seen (at the moment...there are two other
errors while doing a `yum update` I have not looked into) is that the
lucene package from JPackage does not have a -devel portion, which is
needed by eclipse-platform-3.2.2-15.fc7.  I have not looked to see if
lucene from JPackage does a 'provides lucene-devel', but yum doesn't
seem to be able to figure it out.  At the moment I'm not really willing
to rip out my eclipse enviro just to use (and update from) JPackage,
even if I can put the pieces back together.

Your Bugzilla buglist needs attention.

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW or REOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for a week or more.

Your Bugzilla buglist needs attention.

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW or REOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for a week or more.

xml-commons woes

I know this is an old topic but please bear with me.

My computer crashed and I've been rebuilding my system from scratch. My 
current system is CentOS 5.  I'm using jpackage 1.7. I've seen messages 
recommending installing the JDK from the nosrc rpm but i HAVE done that: 
I've installed the Sun JDK 5.0 as well as 1.4.2 using the nosrc rpm.  
But I still get these weird errors in yum telling me:

Error: Missing Dependency: xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed 
by package xml-commons-apis

even though

[scohen <at> localhost ~]$ rpm -q xml-commons{,-apis}
xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
xml-commons-apis-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10

both packages are installed.

Is this an insoluble problem or is there a workaround?  I like jpackage, 
but I need a solution to this.

Thanks.

Re: xml-commons woes

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 20:10 -0500, Steve Cohen wrote:
> I know this is an old topic but please bear with me.
> 
> My computer crashed and I've been rebuilding my system from scratch. My 
> current system is CentOS 5.  I'm using jpackage 1.7. I've seen messages 
> recommending installing the JDK from the nosrc rpm but i HAVE done that: 
> I've installed the Sun JDK 5.0 as well as 1.4.2 using the nosrc rpm.
Ok, that will remove some of the problems with xml-commons then.
> But I still get these weird errors in yum telling me:
> 
> Error: Missing Dependency: xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed 
> by package xml-commons-apis
> 
> even though
> 
> [scohen <at> localhost ~]$ rpm -q xml-commons{,-apis}
> xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
> xml-commons-apis-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
> 
> both packages are installed.
I would like to get some more information about what you are doing when
this problem occurs. Does this issue occur when you do a 'yum update
xml-commons*'? [and post the output]

_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss

Re: xml-commons woes

Steve Cohen wrote:
> I know this is an old topic but please bear with me.
> 
> My computer crashed and I've been rebuilding my system from scratch. My 
> current system is CentOS 5.  I'm using jpackage 1.7. I've seen messages 
> recommending installing the JDK from the nosrc rpm but i HAVE done that: 
> I've installed the Sun JDK 5.0 as well as 1.4.2 using the nosrc rpm.  
> But I still get these weird errors in yum telling me:
> 
> Error: Missing Dependency: xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed 
> by package xml-commons-apis
> 
> even though
> 
> [scohen <at> localhost ~]$ rpm -q xml-commons{,-apis}
> xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
> xml-commons-apis-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
> 
> both packages are installed.
> 
> Is this an insoluble problem or is there a workaround?  I like jpackage, 
> but I need a solution to this.

What yum entry are you using?  I hadn't seen anything for Centos 5 or 
RHEL5 yet - is is supposed to work?

By the way, if you just want tomcat, a recent update to Centso5 should 
make the version included in the core repository work under the Sun JVM.

--

-- 

Your Bugzilla buglist needs attention.

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW or REOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for a week or more.

Re: xml-commons woes

I'm not sure if it's supposed to work or not.  At the bottom of this page:

http://www.jpackage.org/yum.php

is this line:

yum jpackage17-rhes-5 /MIRROR <http://www.jpackage.org/mirroring.php#mirrors>//VERSION/redhat-el-5.0/free/

Does that mean it should work?  Is RHEL 5.0 considrered too bleeding-edge?  

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Steve Cohen wrote:
>   
>> I know this is an old topic but please bear with me.
>>
>> My computer crashed and I've been rebuilding my system from scratch. My 
>> current system is CentOS 5.  I'm using jpackage 1.7. I've seen messages 
>> recommending installing the JDK from the nosrc rpm but i HAVE done that: 
>> I've installed the Sun JDK 5.0 as well as 1.4.2 using the nosrc rpm.  
>> But I still get these weird errors in yum telling me:
>>
>> Error: Missing Dependency: xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed 
>> by package xml-commons-apis
>>
>> even though
>>
>> [scohen <at> localhost ~]$ rpm -q xml-commons{,-apis}
>> xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
>> xml-commons-apis-1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10
>>