Prev: hacker contest
Next: A new reader? Welcome to comp.os.linux.setup, read this first if you're new here (FAQ)
From: Moe Trin on 5 Apr 2008 17:07
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.setup, in article
<47F75FC3.10403(a)gmail.com>, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

>Doug Laidlaw wrote:

>> Moe Trin wrote:

>>> sledguy(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> But now I have an older version, 5.8.0 that is still installed which
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> was installed by RPM. I thought I would just remove it but when I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> execute rpm -e without the -nodep qualifier it tells me of all the
>>>> packages that are dependant upon it.
>>> You are discovering the problem with package managers. Most of them do
>>> not tolerate someone bypassing them by installing tarballs.

>> I missed the beginning of this, but if there is a version of perl on there
>> that needs to be removed, "make uninstall" or its equivalent will (or
>> should) get rid of it for a fresh start.

[compton ~]$ rpm -ql perl | grep Makefile
[compton ~]$

The typical binary rpm (or even .deb) does not come with the Makefile, so
trying to run 'make uninstall' (even assuming /usr/bin/make is installed
and you are in the "right" directory) is not likely to do something
desirable, never mind that the Makefile has an 'uninstall' target.

>That will also randomly flush components of *OTHER* RPM installed packages,
>which the installation overwrote. Ideally, you'd run 'rpm -V' after that to
>see which RPM's need to be re-installed.

Again, I don't know of that many packages that come with Makefiles, and
/usr/bin/make expects the Makefile in the "current" directory. I also
suspect you mean 'rpm -Va' to test all installed packages.

>> The O.P. could try installing his present 5.8.8. package with checkinstall:
>> www.asic-linux.com.mx/~izto/checkinstall/ It is available for most
>> distros, and will take care of the problems he has faced.

Doug - re-read the problem. He installed perl-5.8.8 with no problems other
than the fact that it's a tarball, and his package manager (rpm) still
lists the package that _it_ installed. The correct solution is to NOT
install tarballs to update stuff that was installed by the package
manager. His problem is that he can't tell the package manager that
something has been updated.

>> I have had occasional failures with it, but it would be better (and
>> far easier) than building one's own RPM.

Yes, but it's even easier to stick with the packages supplied by your
distribution. That way, _they_ are monitoring the world news and are
aware when security problems develop. If you don't like using a
package manager, then you probably should be using a different type of
Linux - see the "Linux From Scratch" guide from the LDP (available at
http://tldp.org/guides.html) or go to http://www.linuxfromscratch.org.

Old guy
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: hacker contest
Next: A new reader? Welcome to comp.os.linux.setup, read this first if you're new here (FAQ)