Need this packages RHEL 5.6, Please help
 

Hey all,

I need these packages for RHEL 5.6
I downloaded libffi and libffi-devel from this site
http://pkgs.org/centos-5-rhel-5/epel...86_64.rpm.html

but when I tried to install, it showed me this messages;-
Please advise as how to install these packages.

Thanks,
Manali

he ‘mock’ module is responsible to build the source RPMs (SRPMs) under a chroot environment and uses the ‘mockbuild’ user.
If the mockbuild user does not exist while installing the source RPM, you will receive the ‘Warning: user mockbuild does not exist. using root‘ error message.
In order to fix the warning message, install the ‘mock’ module:
and create the ‘mockbuild’ user
Once done, you should be able to install the required tool under the mockbuild user.

Well, you've been given some of the advice before:

• If you're going to use Red Hat Enterprise, YOU NEED TO PAY FOR IT
• If you ARE paying for RHEL, then don't install packages from third-party repositories.
• Don't install packages with RPM, when you should be using yum.
• If you ARE paying for RHEL, then CALL RED HAT SUPPORT if you have problems downloading/installing packages

And, if you read the 'error', it's actually a warning. The package installed, but since you didn't research things (or use yum, as you've been told before), the 'mock' package that kbscores indicated is why you got the warnings. Had you followed the advice you've been given before, and were paying for Red Hat, you'd not have problems.

If you were using CentOS, and just typed in "yum install <package name>", it would have done all this for you, with no warnings/errors.

I got above error after installing mockbuild,I would like to solve this issue , but really don't know how to go about these.

Please advise.

We did 'advise' before...you seem to ignore the advice:

• If you're going to use Red Hat Enterprise, YOU NEED TO PAY FOR IT
• If you ARE paying for RHEL, then don't install packages from third-party repositories.
• Don't install packages with RPM, when you should be using yum.
• If you ARE paying for RHEL, then CALL RED HAT SUPPORT if you have problems downloading/installing packages

AGAIN, you got a warning...there is no issue to solve. Unless you pay for Red Hat Enterprise, don't use it, period. Load CentOS (and the current version at that), and install things with a yum command.

You've been told before that you need to pay for RHEL, but never seem to acknowledge that. After being here for three years now, and ostensibly reading many other threads where others get told that same thing, it should be fairly clear. RHEL without support is going to be difficult to update, maintain, and patch. Either pay, or use CentOS.

I understand what you say TBone, but my client is using RHEL and I am asked to install those packages, I understand the benifits of Centos over redhat.
but this is not my home pc, its production system and I need to find the way to install these packages.

then your client has a SLA with RH. use it. make the phone call and use the proper installation service/tools provided via RHEL.

there are no benefits of CentOS over RHEL, in fact with CentOS you are missing on all of the great support provided by RH directly. Heck even their lower level SLAs provide for fast e-mail response and you can again always make the phone call.

if you client is using RHEL without a SLA, id address that first. They need to be paying for it. Yes the OS is still freely distributed, but the support structor is what you get with RHEL that you do not get from any of its forks.

Right...so AGAIN, use "yum install <whatever>" to install it. Period. If your 'client' is using RHEL, then THEY should be paying for it, so get them to give you the support contract #, and call support if you're having problems.

AGAIN:

1. You are getting warnings: there are no 'issues' to solve
2. You are using RPM to install, when you should be using yum
3. You should be contacting Red Hat support, since you're using RHEL

Can't say it simpler. We've told you this many times so far, but you don't seem to get it. Have you actually tried to RUN the software you wanted to install???

Hi all,

I installed required packages from this site:-

;)

Thanks

Great...but they were installed before, and you just got WARNINGS, and you never did say whether or not you actually tried RUNNING that software after you installed it.

Thank you for posting this site.

To the people who were rudely trying to "solve" your problem by telling you that you shouldn't have it in the first place:

Some of us (you know, here on planet earth where things aren't always perfect), have clients who cannot or will not purchase a subscription, yet insist on running RHEL. I'll be sure to pass along the word that TB0ne feels very, very strongly that they should definitely have a subscription. I'll let you know what they say.

Yes, and in that perfect world, people actually READ what's posted. The OP didn't have a problem to begin with..he had warnings, but didn't listen to what people told him. He was given solutions that he didn't use. Using RHEL without paying means your system will be out of date, insecure, and difficult to maintain. Anyone who tries to maintain an environment like that when the option to use CentOS for FREE, isn't someone who should be maintaining servers. And amazingly, using RHEL without a subscription isn't a good idea, because you then run into difficulties just like this, that you can avoid by:

• PAYING for what you use
• Using the FREE alternative (CentOS)

Why don't you pass that along, too?

It would be lovely if everything were so black and white, eh?

Nevermind legacy maintenance, servers that are isolated from the internet, budget cuts that negate things like paying for subscriptions that aren't even used, and not being able to just wantonly change the operating system on a server because TB0ne doesn't like people whose subscriptions have expired. So yeah, I'll pass all that on and when the answer comes back that they are going to keep using RHEL5 and they don't care/can't be bothered/aren't going to pay for a subscription, I'll keep installing third party RPMs when I need to because I like my job.

..which is hardly ever an issue, and if that's the case, you won't need to update/install anything else, will you? So, not having a subscription for that one server makes sense.
...which are still used and need to be updated/patched to address security concerns and fix bugs, and can be done so by means of Satellite server, or even a DVD loaded manually.
...which makes using CentOS sensible, since it's FREE
Grow up. If you bothered to read the original question, it was answered several times over. And keeping a system updated doesn't 'change the OS'. It addresses security concerns, fixes bugs, etc. Which is the POINT...to keep a server up and stable.
And I'm sure they'll love that answer and attitude that their systems were compromised, had downtime, or are unstable, because you didn't bother to take the appropriate action and suggest the right way to do things, which IS YOUR JOB.

Argh, you just don't give up do you?

I don't maintain this system, I develop software for it. I have to install things sometimes because I need the corresponding libraries for the development work that I'm doing, not to "keep the system up to date".

And yes, installing CentOS would be changing the OS.

In point of fact, I have advocated very strongly for a switch to CentOS and was told they aren't interested. This isn't my call, and isn't anything I have control over.

These computers are isolated from any and all types of network connections and can only be updated by the (tedious) manual method you mentioned.

The part about the OP only having warnings and probably having his package already installed...ok you have a valid point. But that wasn't the main thrust of your reply, rather you decided to use his issue (misunderstanding or otherwise) to soapbox about something that is completely off topic, whereas the OP kindly posted a reasonable solution to his (perceived) problem, which other people (myself) might have one day found quite useful.

I guess it seems to me that the specifics of my situation don't really matter; the point is that you're running around saying that no one who isn't a complete f***ing idiot could possibly be in a situation where they would need to install third party RPMs on a RHEL system, which is patently false.

Bottom line, the forums are an interactive venue where users of different opinions/background/experience can come together and share helpful advice. TB0ne is convinced his advice is helpful and isn't going to back down from sharing it at every opportunity. If you want a non-interactive venue where you don't have to listen to differing opinions, get a blog. :)

And I am convinced that his advice is off topic and distracting from the actual question asked, and am, in this interactive venue, sharing my opinion as a counter point to his.

As is your right. :) Did you, however, happen to notice this thread was resolved back in May? You are bumping a 3-month-dead thread solely to point out a perceived breach of netiquette... irony much?

Actually, I bumped it to thank the OP for posting the link.

And yeah, I noticed, but since this was the first Google result for the topic, it seemed like a good idea to make sure that anyone reading the thread in the future would know that his solution was a workable one, since the only other input in the thread was entirely negative.

Edit: This had nothing to do with netiquette. It's about the RHEL ecosystem, and how sometimes it's not as black and white as some believe.

And with all that said ... can you guys all please keep on topic now, and maybe migrate the meta-discussion if
you REALLY feel the urge to carry it on to GENERAL?


Thanks.