From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ray Olszewski Subject: Re: SuSE 10.0 and it's RPM 4.1.1?? Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 14:06:23 -0700 Message-ID: <4436D44F.8010700@comarre.com> References: <20060405151039.GA1065@lnx2.kvinet.com> <200604060902.11198.sotl155360@earthlink.net> <20060407182326.GA1046@lnx2.kvinet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060407182326.GA1046@lnx2.kvinet.com> Sender: linux-newbie-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org Hal -- I was hoping you'd get feedback from some RPM user who could answer your questions directly. As you may recall, I'm exclusively a Debian user these days. But I think I may be able to help with some of your confusion. And since I gather that Edgar's off-list reply didn't cover everything you were looking for, I'll give it a try below. Hal MacArgle wrote: > On 04-06, SOTL wrote: > >>On Wednesday 05 April 2006 11:10 am, Hal MacArgle wrote: >> >>>Greetings: A Slackware junkie all my Linux life, I'm just now >>>"playing" with other distributions that use RPM.. >>> >>>At first I thought, piece of cake, invoking rpm -i package.rpm; >>>slick.. >>> >>>That didn't last, when I tried installing a package that didn't play >>>ball, and opened Pandora's box of queries.. Man rpm shed some light, >>>what I understood, so I pulled a book I had covering Red Hat 6.2 - >>>rather old, but just maybe?? >>> >>>rpm -i package.rpm - returns "warning: package.rpm: V3 DSA signature: >>>NOKEY, key ID [octet of characters] >>>error: Failed dependencies: (with a list of no less than 15 of them >>>reporting the exact library needed...) >>> >>>First off, I didn't know what V3 DSA meant, This is probably a digial signature of some sort,intended to prevent package spoofing. About a year ago, Debian added digital authentication to its package sites, and as a result, I routinely have to override it when installing or upgrading packages from unofficial Debian archives. Since you say you were trying to install a package that is not part of the offifial distro you were working with, you most likely ran into something similar that the RPMers are doing now. but the missing >>>dependencies are fairly normal these days.. I had some work ahead of >>>me but the RedHat book said to use rpm -q --redhatprovides >>> and it would list the base package needed.. This is >>>not RedHat, of course, but there is a --provides flag that didn't >>>return anything except that the package was missing.. I tried that >>>entering a library that's either in /lib or /usr/lib, and it returned >>>"Package not installed." I'm presuming this has been changed for, at >>>least, libraries.. Or--is it the NOKEY thingy?? Stumped!! >>> >>>BTW the subject package was fetched from rpm.pbone.net, whereas the >>>rpm's installed previous to that were ones in the SuSE distribution >>>package.. That has to have a lot to do with it, IMHO... >>> >>>Is there a tutorial that explains this better than the man?? TIA. >> >>If I recall correctly RPM stands for Red Hat Package Manager which I believe >>is uses by Fedora/Redhat and FreeMandriva/Mandriva/Mandrake. > > True AFAIK; plus others including Slackware that has the rpm > program but warns us that it doesn't work with all apps... Open > Source keeps us on our toes, eh?? Could it be with SuSe that it means > something like Reliable Package Manager, instead of RedHat Package > Manager?? Stranger things have happened.. The study of acronyms is > another PhD dissertation.. > >>Not sure on this but I believe that SuSE uses a different package system which >>is not compatable with Red Hat's. > > This is what I really needed to know.. "RPM" is not, > necessarily, "RPM"... Open Source again?? > >>I am sure that Debian uses a different system which is also used by Ubuntu and >>Kubuntu. > > Yes; ".deb" and it too probably works with other > distributions unknown by me.. It's getting much more complicated than > when I first found Linux after years of Unix... Quick history lesson: Pretty much all distros that are still around derive from one of three origins: 1. Slackware really has no modern descendents, but it is the oldest branch that's still active. I believe it still uses .tgz packages natively. In a sense, I suppose it (or its anscestors, SLS, Yggdrasil, and perhaps others I've forgotten) spawned everything else, but Red Hat and Debian diverged so fundamentally from Slackware et al. ... for example, abandoning its BSD-style init structure for a SysV structure ... that it's hard to see them as derived from Slackware, even beyond the difference in package managers. 2. Red Hat spawned SuSE, Mandrake, Connectiva, and a ton of others, identifiable by their use of the RPM package manager (which still stands for RedHar Package Manager, as far as I know)/ 3. Debian spawned Knoppix, Ubuntu, DSL, and a bunch of others, identifiable by their use of the .deb packaging format and one or another of the Debian package management systems (dpkg, apt, and the like). That said, the fact that two distros use the same package manager does NOT mean their packages are interchangeable. All distros have their own quirks, in areas like distro-specific kernel patches, slight variation in "what goes where" conventions (like /bin vs /usr/bin), customized init scripts, vert distinctive installers, and probably more. Package naming is not standardized either, so a package from one distro might fail to find in a different distro a file it depends on because the package name for the file is different. Cross installing, even between two distros that use the same package-management system, is generally considered an expert task. In Debian, even installing across flavors (e.g., trying to install a package from Unstable on a Stable or Testing system) is tricky. These days, all good distros cross support one another's package managers, either directly or using a "translator" application like alien. But resolving dependencies remains messy. >>If what you are doing is what I infer from your title that you are trying to >>install RPM into a SuSE system then I do not believe even if there were no >>issues with the package manager that it would work as Red Hat and SuSE do >>things internally sufficiently different that the only package that I am >>aware of that will run equally on both system is OpenOffice.org's Office >>package which basically puts all libraries and all components into a separate >>root directory with no integration. Since this is not the Linux/Unix way but >>is the MS way which OO is emulating I do not believe that you will find any >>other package that will install and run in a equivalent way.Thus I believe >>that it may be best to find the correct SuSE package for installation. From >>past experience not with SuSE but other distributions if you do not you are >>simply asking for problems. > > > More or less, simply, I've been looking for a distribution > that supports streaming video including editing, etc, not that I want > the M$ route either.. It's obviously extremely complicated Yeah, no kidding. Pretty much any major distro will support video capture from a TV-tuner card, probably with a version of mplayer/mencoder (though patent, DRM, and/or licensing messiness may keep the relevant packages outside the official distribution, as happens with Debian). If you want this sort of capture with a pretty interface, look at MythTV, which is (to my eye) best suited to the short-term time-shifting uses that TiVos are also best at ... though some use it to do capture for long-term storage. Editors come and go, and I've never found one I like as much as VirtualDub, a freeware editor that is Windows only. There are several around though ... the term you want to search on is "non-linear editor". The Debian-Sid package archive currently lists a gstreamer plugin, kino, and pitivi. There are probably others not in Debian. "Streaming" is a pretty open-ended term, so I'm not exactly sure what you want to achieve (getting video streams from the Internet? attaching a host to your TV set and having it play video stored on a server elsewhere on your LAN? multicasting a video stream across your LAN so several locations in your home show the same show? putting a DVD in one host and having it play back on another? something else?). Be more specific here and I'll be happy to give you whatever more advice I can (I've been using my Linux server as a TiVo-like backend for several years now, but I don't have any significant experience with files downloaded from streaming sites on the Internet). > so I'm > going to build on what I have already using Slackware 10.2, kernel > 2.4.31... Skirting around to other distributions to make it "simple" > just hasn't happened.. My mind was definately made up when I tried > yet another .rpm package that needed 25 extra dependencies, most of > which I already had in either /lib or /usr/lib and I have no idea why > the package didn't find them... It's moot now... As I said above, the problem with dependencies is probably variation in package names. Usually, if you need to install a package from the upstream provider, rather than the distro itself, the provider will be fairly specific about what distro/version a particular .rpm (or .deb) is designed to work with. At least that's my experience with upstream .deb packages. Color inside the lines and its a piece of cake; ignore posted limitations at your own risk. If the upstream provider doesn't have a package that matches your distro, you typically have to install from source or from a .tgz (and fix any real dependency issues by hand). Again, not really a newbie task (yeah, I know you are no more a newbie than I am, Hal, but this *is* a beginners' list). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs