On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Sean wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> RH published the advisory 2 weeks ago, according to
> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0980. The main repo does not
> appear to have the packages noted yet -
> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/x86_64/Packages/
>
> We'
Hi all,
RH published the advisory 2 weeks ago, according to
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0980. The main repo does not
appear to have the packages noted yet -
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/x86_64/Packages/
We've been waiting on a few of these bugs to be fixed for some ti
Thank you very much!
Sincerely,
Xuwen
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Earl A Ramirez
wrote:
> On 11 September 2016 at 15:38, Xuwen Fang wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > I'm a new centos user, finding that some packages are a little old.
> > How do you solve this kind of problems? I want to install new
On 09/11/2016 03:38 PM, Xuwen Fang wrote:
Hello,
I'm a new centos user, finding that some packages are a little old.
How do you solve this kind of problems? I want to install newer php.
Thank you.
Hi,
read this:
https://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories
In particular SCL may fi
On 11 September 2016 at 15:38, Xuwen Fang wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm a new centos user, finding that some packages are a little old.
> How do you solve this kind of problems? I want to install newer php.
> Thank you.
>
> Sincerely,
> Xuwen
> ___
> CentOS mai
Hello,
I'm a new centos user, finding that some packages are a little old.
How do you solve this kind of problems? I want to install newer php.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Xuwen
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinf
Am 19.09.2014 um 10:25 schrieb John R Pierce :
> On 9/19/2014 1:19 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
>> BTW - rpmforge is no longer maintained.
>
> I actually meant to say, repoforge, which for all practical purposes is the
> successor of rpmforge, including the repo identifier name it uses.
http://list
On 9/19/2014 1:19 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
BTW - rpmforge is no longer maintained.
I actually meant to say, repoforge, which for all practical purposes is
the successor of rpmforge, including the repo identifier name it uses.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
so
Am 18.09.2014 um 22:02 schrieb John R Pierce :
> is rpmforge now considered 'friendly' with EPEL?
>
> I normally only use EPEL as an addition repo, but one package I want to
> install on this one system is ffmpeg, and I'm finding it on rpmforge only...
> but its install wants to mix epel and rpm
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:02 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> is rpmforge now considered 'friendly' with EPEL?
>>
>> I normally only use EPEL as an addition repo, but one package I want to
>> install on this one system is ffmpeg, and I'm finding it
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:02 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> is rpmforge now considered 'friendly' with EPEL?
>
> I normally only use EPEL as an addition repo, but one package I want to
> install on this one system is ffmpeg, and I'm finding it on rpmforge only...
> but its install wants to mix epel an
is rpmforge now considered 'friendly' with EPEL?
I normally only use EPEL as an addition repo, but one package I want to
install on this one system is ffmpeg, and I'm finding it on rpmforge
only... but its install wants to mix epel and rpmforge packages...
Installing:
ffmpeg x86_64 0.6.5-1.e
On 08/20/11 10:33 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> That looks like the PGDG postgres repos to me and not the distribution
> postgres package, What is done there is pretty much out of scope for
> that which Redhat does for their postgres/postgres84 packaging.
yes, it is, but my point was, 'we' (or rather
>
> pg x.y versions prior to 9.0 replaced the PG 8.1 that came in EL5 (9.0
> and later install to new directories so they can exist side by side).
> further, the newer libpq isn't directly compatible with the older libpq,
> so this compat-libs package provides a 'shim' library to fake the older
> v
On 08/20/11 4:43 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
> Different issues. php53*replaces* php. I did this on both a A CentOS
> 4 and two CentOS 5 machines. Mostly painless -- just needed to
pg x.y versions prior to 9.0 replaced the PG 8.1 that came in EL5 (9.0
and later install to new directories so they
At Sat, 20 Aug 2011 13:49:12 +0100 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 07:43 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
>
> > (I did some magic with rpm -qa php\* & sed to get the proper list of
> > stuff to remove and then install.)
>
> One does not require the '\'
One does for tcsh.
On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 09:02 -0400, Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 01:49:12PM +0100, Always Learning wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 07:43 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> >
> > > (I did some magic with rpm -qa php\* & sed to get the proper list of
> > > stuff to remove and th
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 01:49:12PM +0100, Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 07:43 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
>
> > (I did some magic with rpm -qa php\* & sed to get the proper list of
> > stuff to remove and then install.)
>
> One does not require the '\'
Yes you do. Especially
On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 07:43 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> (I did some magic with rpm -qa php\* & sed to get the proper list of
> stuff to remove and then install.)
One does not require the '\'
Server 6 : rpm -qa php\*
php-pdo-5.1.6-27.el5_5.3
php-mbstring-5.1.6-27.el5_5.3
At Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:16:02 -0700 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
> On 08/19/11 10:51 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 04:25:28PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> >> In what way did TUV break php?
> > The package supplies "php53" and not "php" - while this may arguably
On 08/19/11 10:51 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 04:25:28PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> In what way did TUV break php?
> The package supplies "php53" and not "php" - while this may arguably be
> correct in some situations it is not the case across the board and
> c
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 04:25:28PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>
> In what way did TUV break php?
The package supplies "php53" and not "php" - while this may arguably be
correct in some situations it is not the case across the board and
causes dep issues with some packaged php scripts. T
On 08/19/2011 07:22 AM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:54:56PM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
>> install the IUS package. Is there any reason to avoid IUS and stay with the
>> CentOS package?
>
> No, not really.
>
> TUV broke php53 and it won't be fixed in any useful timeframe;
On 19 August 2011 06:22, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:54:56PM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
>> install the IUS package. Is there any reason to avoid IUS and stay with the
>> CentOS package?
>
> No, not really.
>
> TUV broke php53 and it won't be fixed in any useful timeframe
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:54:56PM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> install the IUS package. Is there any reason to avoid IUS and stay with the
> CentOS package?
No, not really.
TUV broke php53 and it won't be fixed in any useful timeframe; IUS'
packages are sane, well maintained and used by Racks
I need to upgrade PHP because the latest WordPress requires one at least at
5.2.4. What are the tradeoffs of using the php53 packages provided by
CentOS versus IUS? I've seen that installing the RHEL-derived php53
requires removing php first and it creates package conflicts because it
doesn't p
This is probably a good place to start.
http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories
--
Mathew S. McCarrell
Clarkson University '10
mccar...@gmail.com
mccar...@clarkson.edu
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:29 AM, fmb fmb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Where can I get a list of all the available repos
Hi,
Where can I get a list of all the available repos with some info about each?
thnx,
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:48:53AM +, Marcelo M. Garcia enlightened us:
I have 2 machines with RHEL 5.2 and I would like to use CentOS repos. I
would like to know if the document "Using CentOS Repositories on RHEL
Machines"[1] can be used in CentOS 5.2 withou
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 09:47:23AM -0700, MHR enlightened us:
> > The only limitation I have been able to see with RHEL's yum is the lack of
> > the priorities plugin. You can use protectbase as a replacement.
>
> Well, sort of - priorities is far more flexible, so protectbase is
> sort of a cripp
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:02 AM, Matt Hyclak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only limitation I have been able to see with RHEL's yum is the lack of
> the priorities plugin. You can use protectbase as a replacement.
Well, sort of - priorities is far more flexible, so protectbase is
sort of a cri
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:48:53AM +, Marcelo M. Garcia enlightened us:
> I have 2 machines with RHEL 5.2 and I would like to use CentOS repos. I
> would like to know if the document "Using CentOS Repositories on RHEL
> Machines"[1] can be used in CentOS 5.2 without too
Hi
I have 2 machines with RHEL 5.2 and I would like to use CentOS repos. I
would like to know if the document "Using CentOS Repositories on RHEL
Machines"[1] can be used in CentOS 5.2 without too much modifications.
Thanks
Marcelo
[1] http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Package
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Ashley M. Kirchner wrote on Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:59:53 -0600:
Uhhh, I don't experience that when I run my rsync script. It
actually does delete stuff that's no longer on the mirror.
Yeah, but the repo seems to keep a lot ... I downloaded 5 or more versions
of the same rpm
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Apparently, I
can avoid it when regularly downloading by specifying a timelimit, but I
can't avoid getting it all when I start a mirror (unless I use a
filelist).
That wouldn't be a mirror then, would it? :) I suppose, if you're
really wanting to, one thing you could at
Ashley M. Kirchner wrote on Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:59:53 -0600:
> Uhhh, I don't experience that when I run my rsync script. It
> actually does delete stuff that's no longer on the mirror.
Yeah, but the repo seems to keep a lot ... I downloaded 5 or more versions
of the same rpm of some software (
Scott Silva wrote:
With the space crunch on the CentOS mirrors, I don't know why they
don't just have the latest files in the updates mirrors and move all
the older stuff to vault. If someone wants an older release of a file,
you need to get it directly anyway. It wouldn't save a ton of space,
John R Pierce wrote:
> um, centos/(vers)/updates/(arch)/RPMS generally has just the latest RPM
> for each updated rpm, except the kernels. I see very little redundancy
> there.
That's not completely true:
tomcat5-5.5.23-0jpp.1.0.3.el5.i386.rpm
tomcat5-5.5.23-0jpp.1.0.4.el5.i386.rpm
tomcat5-5
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Lorenzo Quatrini wrote:
> Kai Schaetzl ha scritto:
> > Lorenzo wrote on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:38:21 +0200:
> >
> > > Have you tried mrepo?
> >
> > How would this help? The main problem is to get rid of the "old" updates.
> > Kai
>
> You're right, I thought that mrepo would get r
Scott Silva wrote:
With the space crunch on the CentOS mirrors, I don't know why they
don't just have the latest files in the updates mirrors and move all
the older stuff to vault. If someone wants an older release of a file,
you need to get it directly anyway. It wouldn't save a ton of space,
Scott Silva wrote:
> With the space crunch on the CentOS mirrors, I don't know why they
> don't just have the latest files in the updates mirrors and move all
> the older stuff to vault. If someone wants an older release of a file,
> you need to get it directly anyway. It wouldn't save a ton of spa
on 10/11/2007 7:16 AM Ashley M. Kirchner spake the following:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Thanks, but this will still download and keep *all* updates for a
platform.
If they exist on the mirror, then yes. However, anything that gets
removed from the mirror you're using, will also get deleted from y
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Thanks, but this will still download and keep *all* updates for a
platform.
If they exist on the mirror, then yes. However, anything that gets
removed from the mirror you're using, will also get deleted from your
local copy. That's the whole idea behind rsync's --delete
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Lorenzo Quatrini wrote:
Kai Schaetzl ha scritto:
Lorenzo wrote on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:38:21 +0200:
Have you tried mrepo?
How would this help? The main problem is to get rid of the "old" updates.
Kai
Back in the old days, I used to use autoupdate .. and I believe th
Kai Schaetzl ha scritto:
Lorenzo wrote on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:38:21 +0200:
Have you tried mrepo?
How would this help? The main problem is to get rid of the "old" updates.
Kai
You're right, I thought that mrepo would get rid of old updates by himself, but
id doesn't.
I am looking right no
Mark pryor wrote on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:30:46 -0700 (PDT):
> I only have a comment about the base mirror. Instead of using the internet to
make a base mirror (not sure you did it that way), you can use the
CentOS-Media.repo
Ah, well, I remember having read about this, but admit I didn't think abo
Ross S. W. Walker wrote on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:47:07 -0400:
> Yes a lot of past versions are kept in the repo, but if you filter
> those out then it wouldn't be a "mirror" then?
Well, I'm just interested in the latest bits ;-)
>
> Be careful with the "repomd.xml" file, delete it before starting
Ashley M. Kirchner wrote on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:45:42 -0600:
> Use rsync. I keep a local copy of the updates, specific to my
> platform. I'm also very specific in WHAT I want locally as you'll see
> in the following script.
Thanks, but this will still download and keep *all* updates for a
pl
Lorenzo wrote on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:38:21 +0200:
> Have you tried mrepo?
How would this help? The main problem is to get rid of the "old" updates.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Kai Schaetzl ha scritto:
I figured I try if I can mirror the base and updates repos locally.
There's no tutorial for that, only one about creating your own repo of
packages which is not the same. So, I just mirrored all the stuff with
wget and changed the baseurl in the repo files and hoped tha
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
*But* I then realized that the updates directory contains *all* updates,
not just the latest. Which means if I don't regularly check I may get old
versions mirrored I don't want. It also means that I get a lot of unwanted
files at the time I start to mirror. And I cannot del
Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I figured I try if I can mirror the
base and updates repos locally.
There's no tutorial for that, only one about creating your own repo of
packages which is not the same. So, I just mirrored all the stuff with
wget and changed the baseurl in the repo fi
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> I figured I try if I can mirror the base and updates repos locally.
> There's no tutorial for that, only one about creating your
> own repo of
> packages which is not the same. So, I just mirrored all the
> stuff with
> wget and changed the baseurl in the repo files an
I figured I try if I can mirror the base and updates repos locally.
There's no tutorial for that, only one about creating your own repo of
packages which is not the same. So, I just mirrored all the stuff with
wget and changed the baseurl in the repo files and hoped that's enough.
Works. So eas
54 matches
Mail list logo
