Re: apt, searching archives

[Steven Pritchard <steve@silug.org>]

On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 11:49:15AM -0500, Robert Citek wrote:
> Thanks, Steve.  Just curious, how does this rpm differ from the one at  
> freshrpms?

The fedora.us package enforces GPG signatures and has some random
other spiffy scripts added (like the mirror selector).  Take a look in
/usr/lib/apt/scripts after it is installed to see what I'm talking
about.

> We'll eventually move to FC1 and then FC2.  We only recently migrated  
> to RH9 because RH7.2 no longer worked for us, RH9 works good enough for  
> now, and we are comfortable enough with RH9.  We experimented somewhat  
> with FC1 and found that some things did not work for us, mostly some  
> 3rd-party software that required older packages and libraries to be  
> installed.

There are usually compat- packages for that sort of thing.

About the only trouble I've seen is the occasional (*very* occasional)
piece of software that doesn't want to run with exec-shield enabled.
(UML (User Mode Linux) is the only example that comes to mind.)
That's very easily solved by running the broken executable under
"i386" (from the setarch package).

RH9 still has some of the nasty rpm bugs from RH8, although they are
*much* harder to trigger.  FC1 gets rid of those bugs entirely.
Between that and the addition of exec-shield, I long ago moved all my
servers to FC1...  (I'm still evaluating FC2 on a case-by-case basis.)

> We are, however, noticing some flakey NFS behaviour with the stock RH9  
> install, something we did not notice in RH7.2.  Nothing tragic, just  
> annoying.  Hopefully, updating the kernel and an 'apt-get upgrade' will  
> resolve those issues.

Good luck.  :-)

Steve
-- 
steve@silug.org           | Southern Illinois Linux Users Group
(618)398-7360             | See web site for meeting details.
Steven Pritchard          | http://www.silug.org/

-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.