From: Tommy Reynolds (TommyReynolds_at_yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 15:59:53 -0500
On Wed, 04 May 2005 10:52:20 -0400, Bill wrote:
> What I understand is the following.
> --- tar.gz's install themselves almost anywhere but where FC3 expects them,
> so it's better not to use them.
Correct in detail, but not in spirit. There is no "correct" place to
install anything. (OK, you HSF folks get off my back, I'm
simplifying to make a point here.) We prefer RPM's because the
vastly simplify the system administration effort. For example,
program A requires library B of exactly revision C else it will
break. Months later, a new C+1 version of the library comes out.
Should you install it or no? With RPM, we catch this sort of
> --- RedHat RPM utility is almost no good at installing updates and new
> versions or even new softs because of dependencies.
Wrong. RPM is just a low-level tool that does one thing and that one
thing well. It's a good hammer that makes a poor screwdriver.
> --- Yum is better with dependencies but is a hassle with gpg keys which are
> hard to find and as I can see, often not available.
No, again. Before trying to use a repository, always visit their web
site to get the GPG keys so that you can automatically validate each
package before you try to install it.
If getting the GPG keys causes you heartburn, then just edit the
"/etc/yum.repo.d/" repo file and turn off the gpg validation. No
sweat, because *you* get to choose, not Redmond.
> Last versions of softs FC3 specific almost do not exist but exist for
> almost any other linux brews.
Very few packages are distro specific these days. If you can't find
a pre-built binary RPM for your program, you can usually just
download the source rpm and install it yourself:
# wget ftp://url/of/foo/package/src/rpm
# rpmbuild --rebuild /path/to/foo/package/src/rpm/on/my/system
# rpm -Uvh /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/foo-*.rpm
is usually a sufficient incantation.
> Is there a difference in the isos I dnlded from the net and a distro from RH
If you downloaded RH9 iso's the answer is no.
If you downloaded FC3 iso's the answer is still no.
> It doesn't make a very good picture of FC3 to me. Could it be one of the
> reasons why big sites like Yahoo use FreeBSD instead of RH !?
No. FreeBSD is very "stable". Translation: it's not updated very
often but if it already does what you want, then it's hunky dory.
FCn, on the other hand, is on a fixed 6-month or so release cycle so
folk can always get the very latest software. Lots of folk consider
one-year old software too dated to even consider. Well, in the case
of security issues, they are right. (No, I'm not giving judgement
about FreeBSD here; about the only updates they seem to do are
> I wonder how many ISP use the last versions of apache-php-mysql on FC3 or
> even RH !!
> Can you answer that question ?
See above ;-)
> I'm giving myself 'till the week end to have that nightmare turn into
> something more intelligent. The best answers I had are from you. I always
> get a "why not stay with what RH distributes". The answer is easy, RH is
> almost 3 years behind with the techno they insert in their distro. Mysql is
> testing version 5, PHP is testing version 6 I think, and RH sticks with
> versions 3.23 and 4.0. :-(
That's why there is the FCn effort. RH isn't "sticking" with
anything: RH9 is simply a dead, dead, dead project but nobody has yet
deleted its files.
> To stay in the RPM subject, Apache give keys for their tarball versions. Are
> these keys usable with the rpm I found on rpmfind ?
Dunno anything about Apache keys. If you're talking about them
supplying MD5 checksums, that is so you can verify that you've
downloaded the tarballs correctly -- got nothing to do with
installation or runtime.
> Or better maybe, if I want to use Apache tarballs, what must I do to have
> httpd run with the same options and in the same environment as FC3's httpd
> version ? In other words, replace or maybe upgrade FC3's version with the
> one in the tarball.
Well, the instructions and changes you need to do this are in the RPM
Simply put, an RPM contains the *original* tarball with separate
instructions and patches to make it run on the RH/FCn system.
If you want to try their very latest tarball, you might see if it has
the necessary stuff in it to construct its own RPM. Then you get the
best of both worlds:
# rpmbuild -ta /path/to/the/tarball
and if that doesn't complain, then look in
# ls /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS
# ls /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386
for the RPMS that you should now install normally.
HTH and good luck