LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Red Hat
User Name
Password
Red Hat This forum is for the discussion of Red Hat Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 09-26-2009, 06:53 PM   #1
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
repo files made by me for various CentOS repositories


Note: I have returned the links as promised. there are some changes tho.

Hi all,

Here is something for those who can not find packages/programs for CentOS 5.x (it can be used for RHEL 5.x also), for desktop use. You should not use these packages on production servers.

I use several extra repositories for my search for packages: epel, atrpms, rpmforge, lfarkas, remi, virtualmin(+webmin), Karanbir Singh's repository, pidgin and adobe-linux (from few days ago, I also have elrepo ready to use). I am not posting links to *.repo files for easy access to those repositories on this forums. If you need them, please visit my repository site, since I was asked to avoid putting links to them here. I also run my own repository rpms.plnet.rs. Further down is link to release rpm.

Notes:
--plnet and plnet-test repositories are i386 only. Those packages are,recompiled from various Fedora src.rpm's, with minimum modifications. plnet-downloaded is for packages downloaded from various websites for easier installation. Also, new repository is plnet-releases where I keep a copy of original repository release packages as well as mine release package. There are src rpms also: srpms.plnet and srpms.plnet-test.

--Packages in plnet-test are not tested or seriously change some of the core packages so use them with great care and not on the production servers until you are quite happy with the results on your test machine. Similar, but in much lesser form should be also applied to plnet

--01.Nov.2009: I've revised my policy regarding repo files I created. From now on, only my repository and EPEL repository are needed for all the packages I recommend. Packages taken from other repositories (except EPEL) are always placed in plnet-downloaded repository. So to install packages from my repositories, either install epel-release from EPEL and plnet-release from http://rpms.plnet.rs/, and then use YUM, or just download plnet-release from http://rpms.plnet.rs/ and run "yum install epel-release" and then install packages.

--To use disabled repo from command line use this syntax:
Code:
yum install <package name> --enablerepo=<repository name>
like
Code:
yum install krusader --enablerepo=plnet
if you fish to search for specific package in ALL repositories, you can use
Code:
yum list krusader --enablerepo=*
To use my repository, I have compiled plnet-release-0.9-1.el5.noarch.rpm. It has all four plnet repositories, but only "plnet-downloaded" and "plnet-releases" are enabled.

So far there is no GPG signature. I am planing to implement it soon.
If you do not feel comfortable using packages without GPG, please wait until I implement it!


Installation options:

Download and install plnet-release-0.9-1.el5.noarch.rpm (if it does not work, visit my web site at http://rpms.plnet.rs and download latest version) and you are good to go. Run your favorite yum manager. I use 2 such managers, yumex and guyum (after installation copy link to the desktop or panel and change command from "guyum" to "guyum.sh")

Programs I install on any new installation are:

1. yumex - Powerful yum GUI but shows only latest version of packages
2. guyum - yum GUI with no uninstall option (Launcher needs ".sh" as
suffix to work out of box)
3. krusader - Total Commander like file manager (plnet version is
better, icon is fixed)
4. fuse-ntfs-3g - NTFS read/write kernel module package
5. webmin - web based config tool (I am sure you use it, but you should
have mention it when you wrote about setting up firewall.
6. shorewall - Excellent firewall implementation supported in webmin
7. amarok-extras-freeworld - extra decoders for excellent audio player
8. k3b - DVD/CD burning tool
9. smplayer - excellent GUI for MPlayer engine
10. d4x - Downloader 4 X
11. ktorrent - Nice Torrent application
12. pidgin - IM client
13. skype
14. gwhere - CD collection program
15. Openoffice.org 3.1.1 packages (Deinstall/remove OpenOffice 2.x version from your system, and install one of the following variants:
English version: Install (or update) package called "ooo3-en-US" ("yum install ooo3-en-US --enablerepo=plnet")
Serbian latin version: Install (or update) package called "ooo3-sh" ("yum install ooo3-sh --enablerepo=plnet")
Serbian cyrilic version: Install (or update) package called "ooo3-sr" ("yum install ooo3-sr --enablerepo=plnet")
"ooo3-*" are my wrapper packages to make installation easy. They depend on all needed packages. Other languages are to be added, but I can not say when. If you need them, please e-mail me so I put those first.

For servers:
16. freeradius
17. newer versions of PHP5 and MySQL from remi's repository
18. virtualmin (original installation is recommended via their install.sh script).

Other interesting packages:
19. dpkg
12. ghostscript-8.63
21. isomaster
22. jre - java runtime
23. fglrx - ATI graphics drivers
24. nvidiagraphics - nVidia graphics drivers
25. madwifi - working madwifi drivers even for PCI Express radios, no N
support (rpm's, rpmforge I think, not sure, notebook is turned off, version is 0.9.5 with matching kernel module)
26. nxserver - server to login to GUI from remote PC (not VNC, separate
desktop)
27. VirtualBox -rpm downloaded from their site.
28. gnome-subtitles - subtitle editing

Tested for a very short period of time, they worked, but they are potentially dangerous. Please e-mail me with your observations, especially if they work without problems:
29. Mozilla Firefox 3.5.3
30. Mozilla Thunderbird 3.0b3

Not RPM's:
31. foo2zjs - driver for printers without firmware like my HP LaserJet 1020. Installs and works without problems. 14.Nov.2009: I have just compiled rpm's for this drivers (42 laser printers) with script to download firmware and ICM files. The last problem to solve is installing hotplug does not work for now (HP LJ 1xxx). (If rpm's do not work, download site is on http://foo2zjs.rkkda.com/. All instructions are on given site, and there are links for other printers.)

Note: There is yum-3.2.22-20.el5 in CentOS 5.4!, providing (limited) --downgrade option.

14.11.2009: Also, there is plnet-centos-bundle (fake) package that has dependencies for almost all packages mentioned here, along with additional small packages I find usefull in desktop use. Requirements are epel repositori enabled and OpenOffice 2.3.x removed from the system so 3.1.1 version can be installed.

Last edited by DrLove73; 11-13-2009 at 06:16 PM.
 
Old 09-27-2009, 04:05 AM   #2
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
Please don't

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Centos-plnet-extra.repo
0. By dumping all repo information in your single Centos-plnet-extra.repo you fsck with how Yum repo configuration is intended to be used.
1. Mixing repo's like you suggest is not a best practice (think At-rpms vs Freshrpms) and may lead to "interesting" results.
2. By posting your Centos-plnet-extra.repo you make yourself responsible for providing updates when any of the listed repo details change. And I haven't even verified if your repo information is actually accurate or complete.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Centos-plnet.repo
3. By not providing your GPG signature you deny users the crucial opportunity to verify the packages are really issued by you.
4. By not providing source RPMs right now you deny users the crucial opportunity to verify the changes you have made.
5. By providing RPMs that are not GPG-signed you aid abuse and worse.
6. By saying "(..), or just downloaded from websites for easier installation." you are not being precise nor are you promoting best practices. Taking packages from upstream sources other than F, RH or Centos might unnecessarily expose users to practices of other distribution or packager practices.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Packages in plnet-test are not tested or seriously change some of the core packages so use them with great care and not on the production servers until you are quite happy with the results on your test machine. Similar, but in much lesser form should be also applied to plnet.
Well, how much lesser bad would plnet be then? How much better did you actually test packages? Details!


By not providing personal information we can't even figure out your involvement in Fedora, Red Hat or Centos with respect to packaging, let alone if you have the required skills. Next to that each official and third party repo is responsible for their own repository. They all provide their own separate Yum repo configuration file packaged in a RPM they issue themselves. By setting up your repo in the "Man in the Middle" way you did you can seriously harm the trust people put in this way of package management. If you want to get your hands dirty building packages I suggest you offer your package management skills to one of the existing repos instead of diluting efforts. The comments above may seem harsh to you but they are not an attack on your person. You should understand that providing a repo is a commitment and a responsability, not some game you play when you want to.


Those who understand Yum, RPM package management, who value accountability and package integrity are strongly suggested not to install these repo files or use these packages until questions about the repo owner, package details and verification are cleared in a satisfactory way.

HTH
 
Old 09-27-2009, 09:19 AM   #3
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
Ok, I understand your concerns so I removed all links in original post until it conforms to best practices and/or adds appropriate warnings.
If moderators on this forum agree that after necessary changes post is acceptable, I will return them, not before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
0. By dumping all repo information in your single Centos-plnet-extra.repo you fsck with how Yum repo configuration is intended to be used.
Copying several repo files knows to be tedios or complicates things. My intention is to allow potential CentOS users or those who would like to try it to be able to get hold of desired programs that are now available in stock CentOS. I would be satisfied even with links to official repo RPM's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
1. Mixing repo's like you suggest is not a best practice (think At-rpms vs Freshrpms) and may lead to "interesting" results.
Freshrpms (rpmforge) are disabled by default, I use only few packages from them. Only epel, atrpms-stable, pidgin and adobe-linux are enabled by default so users who now lesser about yum will not harm their systems. I haven't had much time to implement priorities and protection plugins for yum, but I intend to do so as soon as I find time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
2. By posting your Centos-plnet-extra.repo you make yourself responsible for providing updates when any of the listed repo details change. And I haven't even verified if your repo information is actually accurate or complete.
Good point. What about disclamer that this is just to allow them to get familiar with available repositories and previously offered links to original repo RPM's?

Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
3. By not providing your GPG signature you deny users the crucial opportunity to verify the packages are really issued by you.
So far I have to found a way to implement this in mrepo I use. If anyone knows how, please PM me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
4. By not providing source RPMs right now you deny users the crucial opportunity to verify the changes you have made.
This is just a technical issue, mrepo generates main pages, and I am looking into adding link to SRPMS folder by manual. So far I had one web page/repository combined with mirrors of all mentioned repositories for i386. I made necesary changes to separate them only hour or two before this post and it was geting VERY late (2 AM) to find a solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
5. By providing RPMs that are not GPG-signed you aid abuse and worse.
Good point, answer is as for 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
6. By saying "(..), or just downloaded from websites for easier installation." you are not being precise nor are you promoting best practices. Taking packages from upstream sources other than F, RH or Centos might unnecessarily expose users to practices of other distribution or packager practices.
This was just for one package, HP printer drivers. Web site provided has all necesary installation instructions, and creating package for those drivers could prove to be dificult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post
Well, how much lesser bad would plnet be then? How much better did you actually test packages? Details!
All packages in plnet repo are made for my benefit and used on the daily basis. Those that I am not comfortable with are put in plnet-test. I am planing to create simple web site that will have short explanation for every package. Better option would be if somone would "adopt them" for hosting on their repository.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unSpawn View Post

By not providing personal information we can't even figure out your involvement in Fedora, Red Hat or Centos with respect to packaging, let alone if you have the required skills. Next to that each official and third party repo is responsible for their own repository. They all provide their own separate Yum repo configuration file packaged in a RPM they issue themselves. By setting up your repo in the "Man in the Middle" way you did you can seriously harm the trust people put in this way of package management. If you want to get your hands dirty building packages I suggest you offer your package management skills to one of the existing repos instead of diluting efforts. The comments above may seem harsh to you but they are not an attack on your person. You should understand that providing a repo is a commitment and a responsability, not some game you play when you want to.


Those who understand Yum, RPM package management, who value accountability and package integrity are strongly suggested not to install these repo files or use these packages until questions about the repo owner, package details and verification are cleared in a satisfactory way.

HTH
I am not offended in any way, they are all good points. I planed to publish those rpms from my repo few months ago, but I always delayed it for one reason or another. The thing that was bothering me was that for instance I recompiled/created CentOS rpms for madwifi driver for AR5007 that no one had but I never had time to publish them anywhere. And I used them on my MSI notebook without any problems. Also several months ago, I repacked OpenOffice.org 3.0 with (support/dictionaries for Serbian language) from *.dep to *.rpm's using dpkg package I recompiled (I think my first real task). There where some issues since I tried to replicate installation process from tar.gz version, so I left it for when I have more time and that prolonged until 2 months ago when they issues rpm version packed as tar.gz. Since you need to unpack it then to figure out all necessary packages needed in installation command, I decided to publish it through my own public repo so CentOS users can start using it without delay that would be caused with finding repository willing to publish it (with changes and preparations most likely asked of me for which I can not spare time right now.

As for my personal info, I am Ljubomir Ljubojevic from Srbobran, Serbia, I operate small WISP and hosting company, but my primary income comes from maintaining network and PC's for several companies mostly in my town, and administering another WISP on the other end of my country. My small biography is posted on my (so far) main site: www.plcomputers.net, but only on Serbian. Beside those activities, I worked as a software developer on windows platform for several years. I am also strong speaker in favor of CentOS, even on desktops, but am in no way associated with any CentOS/RH/Fedora organization other that being on their mailing lists. After I reorganize my priorities I do plan to get involved but for now I am happy with recompiling packages that can not be found anywhere else and helping others with my knowledge when ever I can.

I guess my best reference is on forums.star-os.com where I help others the longest, and earned nice reputation points for ~2800 posts so far.

Please ask for any other info needed, and/or any suggestion that will help that my idea comes to life. I will see that SRPMS folder is up as soon as possible, and I will send to any moderator/advanced member link to site where rpms's and repo files are hosted.

Last edited by DrLove73; 09-27-2009 at 09:23 AM.
 
Old 09-28-2009, 10:39 AM   #4
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Ok, I understand your concerns so I removed all links in original post until it conforms to best practices and/or adds appropriate warnings.
If moderators on this forum agree that after necessary changes post is acceptable, I will return them, not before.
Being a moderator in this forum I agree.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Copying several repo files knows to be tedios or complicates things. My intention is to allow potential CentOS users or those who would like to try it to be able to get hold of desired programs that are now available in stock CentOS. I would be satisfied even with links to official repo RPM's.
I don't agree. I do understand your motive for wanting to help people but this is the way things work and really, throwing all data on one heap doesn't provide a huge advantage. You really shouldn't want to press this issue for the two reasons I already mentioned: responsability (theirs, not yours) and the way Yum is intended to be used.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Good point. What about disclamer that this is just to allow them to get familiar with available repositories and previously offered links to original repo RPM's?
I'd still disagree: they better learn how to do things the right way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Freshrpms (rpmforge) are disabled by default, I use only few packages from them. Only epel, atrpms-stable, pidgin and adobe-linux are enabled by default so users who now lesser about yum will not harm their systems. I haven't had much time to implement priorities and protection plugins for yum, but I intend to do so as soon as I find time.
See, it isn't about what you do right now but what others want to. I trust Dag and I trust RPMforge. I've never had problems with their packages (in a way that's memorable, OK ;-p) But I would never ever mix it with At. (I'll leave my experiences with and opinion about that repo out of this.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
So far I have to found a way to implement this in mrepo I use. If anyone knows how, please PM me.
Forum use comes with some very simple rules like: "asked here, answered here". I hope I don't have to explain the benefits for doing things that way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
This is just a technical issue, mrepo generates main pages, and I am looking into adding link to SRPMS folder by manual. So far I had one web page/repository combined with mirrors of all mentioned repositories for i386. I made necesary changes to separate them only hour or two before this post and it was geting VERY late (2 AM) to find a solution.
I've looked at the http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/tools/mrepo/docs/ but I couldn't find the option. Versopn 0.8.6 however does support the rhnget "--source" option so somehow it should be able to deal with SRPMs...


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
This was just for one package, HP printer drivers. Web site provided has all necesary installation instructions, and creating package for those drivers could prove to be dificult.
Doesn't the WinFF package also read "ubuntu" in the .src.rpm filename and doesn't it also say "converted from deb to rpm with alien"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
All packages in plnet repo are made for my benefit and used on the daily basis.
That is good but you should aim to share experiences. If you have a mailing list then people can report back and comment on packages more easily. Sourceforge supports OSS, and while your work isn't exactly a package, maybe they could see fit to support your repository. Maybe try opening a project as it has some benefits like a bug tracker, mailing lists et cetera.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Those that I am not comfortable with are put in plnet-test. I am planing to create simple web site that will have short explanation for every package. Better option would be if somone would "adopt them" for hosting on their repository.
Well, that's a good reason for offering your support to an existing and experienced repo. That way you can make sure your packages will adhere to standards and that packaging efforts are not unnecessarily diluted.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
I am not offended in any way, they are all good points.
Thanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
(..) Also several months ago, I repacked OpenOffice.org 3.0 with (support/dictionaries for Serbian language) from *.dep to *.rpm's using dpkg
I do not think that converting .deb to .rpm is a packaging "best practice"...


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
After I reorganize my priorities I do plan to get involved
That's good to hear!


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Please ask for any other info needed, and/or any suggestion that will help that my idea comes to life. I will see that SRPMS folder is up as soon as possible, and I will send to any moderator/advanced member link to site where rpms's and repo files are hosted.
I think 0) having and publishing your GPG signature, 1) publishing GPG-signed packages ('rpm --addsign /path/to/filename.rpm'), 2) publishing your SRPM tree (could be any docroot dir as long as you advertise it's there) and 3) having a place for feedback are the four most things. I have no further questions right now so when you fix those things then (apart from the Quality Assurance part) you're good to go. Since people should now have some idea what it takes to have, trust and use a repo I think you could post your plnet .repo files (meaning except the combined Freshrpms/EPEL/etc/.. one).

Good luck with it!
 
Old 09-28-2009, 02:01 PM   #5
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
OK, thanks for good advices.

As far as deb to rpm conversion, I agree in general, but in this case, OpenOffice.org was set to just simply unpack to /opt/... folder, and website master marked it as for Fedora/RHEL also. First time I installed it like that, but having to unpack it and then run the installer was ugly, and it also missed the desktop and menu icons which I found in Fedora's repository I think.

I am happy to report that Firefox 3.5.3 is doing excellent on centOS 5.3, with "stock" dependencies. I am currently writing from "her". It's up for 10-15 hours without any problems. Thunderbird 3.0b4 is also compiled and ready to rock, but since this is still heavy beta, I will be happy to see it running when I test it.

As for SRPMS, I think I found a solution, and plan to publish links for plnet repo as soon as I do.

I also removed few packages I am not 100% sure of, until I decide what to do with them.

Mailing list was already activated for that domain, but I need to learn how to set it up first.

Joining a existing repo also requires to set aside time and to set up both x86_64 and i386 environment, writing explanations and who knows what. For now, I dont have time to spare, so this will be quick (and unfortunately "dirty" release of rpm's until I find permanent solution.
 
Old 09-30-2009, 06:21 PM   #6
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
First time I installed it like that, but having to unpack it and then run the installer was ugly, and it also missed the desktop and menu icons which I found in Fedora's repository I think.
I don't know what your definition of "ugly" is (subjective) but shouldn't missing .desktop and icon files be fixed either upstream or in the distribution?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
I also removed few packages I am not 100% sure of, until I decide what to do with them.
Excellent move!


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Mailing list was already activated for that domain, but I need to learn how to set it up first.
Do you use Mailman?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
Joining a existing repo also requires to set aside time and to set up both x86_64 and i386 environment, writing explanations and who knows what. For now, I dont have time to spare,
If you don't have time then that's where it ends. Period. But I think repo's would appreciate all the help they can get and they probably don't expect you to be or become a fulltime, experienced packager overnight. Also tasks may be compartmentalized: maybe there's even dedicated (more experienced) packagers who solely focus on %archs like x64, PPC et cetera. If you're curious, why not just have a friendly chat with a few of them to find out?
 
Old 09-30-2009, 07:14 PM   #7
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
Mailing list was set up with Virtualmin GPL. All I did was to select the option to create mailing list. As I said, I need to read/learn about it as soon as I find time.

Fixing things in upstream distributions again comes with necessary time to elaborate what is wrong, suggest a fix, etc., etc. Multiplied with number of packages.

As for the available time, the lack of it is just temporary. For couple of years I've disregarded some personal and business "things" I should have done on time. Right now I am fixing that by adding extra time to catch up with that isuess/todo's. My plan is to finish it until the new year, so I can focus on the things I care about doing, and one of them is OSS on Linux (and Windows) platform.

But 3 months is too much time to deny CentOS users the things I've compiled and already successfully using. Hence the plnet repo, possibly only until I join some bigger repo group. Some of the rpm's are compiled in January, that is 9 months ago they are siting in my repository without anyone knowing about them, or using them.

I've created the srpms through mrepo as separate folders, so I am good to go after I GPG packages, and create small web page for the starters. I also made separate folders for just downloaded rpm's, so I do not take credit for their compilation. On most of the recompiled rpm's I am not even mentioned as repacker since that is not important to me. You already have the link, so if you wish, you can browse to see the changes.

Good thing to report is that Firefox 3.5.3 is working excellent, 3 days non-stop running without a single crash. Thunderbird 3.0b4 has been tested also, Installed and used for 20-30 minutes. I have received mail and have sent one also, but I had to go to work, so I had no more time for rigorous testing (and it is beta software, so bugs are expected).

Last edited by DrLove73; 09-30-2009 at 07:15 PM.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 02:12 PM   #8
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
I don't know how you configured things but I see the .src.rpms mixed in with the packages? Anyway, I'll not be forcing you to GPG-sign your packages: LQ members have had fair warning now. Feel free to edit your post and add the URIs back in and good luck with things.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 03:42 PM   #9
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
Where exactly do you see src files mixed with regular rpms? Maybe only in RPMS.all, but that will not be publicized as repository. All other folders are negative on src files, I just checked once more.

I need to change and test my repo files to reflect changes, so it will be in a day or two.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 02:26 PM   #10
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
OK. When you're done please report the proper URI and repo files.
 
Old 10-06-2009, 06:21 PM   #11
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
I've returned links for my repositories, and also added release rpm package and wrapper packages for easy installation of OpenOffice.org 3.1.1 in desired language.

GPG will be done soon, as also a collection of all release rpm packages I use, in "plnet-releases".

Any suggestions are welcome.

Last edited by DrLove73; 10-06-2009 at 06:37 PM.
 
Old 10-31-2009, 07:22 PM   #12
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
I've revised my policy regarding repo files I created. From now on, only my repository and EPEL repository are needed for all the packages I recommend and make available in my repositories. See the first post for more details.

I have jet to find time to learn and actually GPG packages.

Last edited by DrLove73; 10-31-2009 at 07:50 PM.
 
Old 10-31-2009, 07:50 PM   #13
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
I just finished compiling foo2zjs package(es) for 42 Linux printer drivers and need people to download it and test is. It's in my plnet-test repository, and src rpm is here.

Note: Binary rpm's are for CentOS 5.x i386 only. If you use X86_64 edition, you can recompile from src rpm.

Drivers are NOT (anymore) coupled with firmware and ICM files for easy newbie installation. There is firmware_icm script with GUI to download them afterwords, and there is hotplug issue with some HP LaserJet printers. There is explanation 2-3 posts down.

However, rpm's are not yet signed with GPG so if you are uncomfortable with that, do not install them, and please go to http://foo2zjs.rkkda.com/ and install it from source.

If you do install them, please report it to office at plcomputers dot net with success level.

Source tarball is on http://foo2zjs.rkkda.com/.

List of supported printers:

Code:
Minolta/QMS magicolor 2300 DL          foo2zjs
Minolta/QMS magicolor 2200 DL          foo2zjs
Konica Minolta magicolor 2430 DL       foo2zjs
Minolta Color PageWorks/Pro L          foo2zjs
HP LaserJet P2035                      foo2zjs
HP LaserJet 1022                       foo2zjs
HP LaserJet 1020                       foo2zjs
HP LaserJet 1018                       foo2zjs
HP LaserJet 1005                       foo2zjs
HP LaserJet 1000                       foo2zjs
HP LaserJet M1319 MFP                  foo2zjs PRINTER ONLY; Alpha Quality
HP LaserJet P1005/P1006/P1007/P1008    foo2xqx driver
HP LaserJet P1505/P2014                foo2xqx driver
HP LaserJet M1005/M1120 MFP            foo2xqx driver
HP Color LaserJet CP1215               foo2hp driver
HP Color LaserJet 1600/2600n           foo2hp driver
HP Color LaserJet 2605dn               Unsupported. Use Postscript
Code:
Konica Minolta magicolor 2480/2490 MF  foo2lava driver
Konica Minolta magicolor 2530 DL       foo2lava driver
Konica Minolta magicolor 1680MF/1690MF foo2lava driver
Konica Minolta magicolor 1600W         foo2lava driver
Samsung CLP-300/310/315/600/610        foo2qpdl driver
Xerox Phaser 6110                      foo2qpdl driver
Lexmark C500n                          foo2slx driver
Oki C3100n/C3200n/C3300/C3400n         foo2hiperc driver
Oki C5100n/C5200n                      foo2hiperc driver
Oki C5500n/C5600n/C5800n               foo2hiperc driver
HP Color LaserJet 1500 	               foo2oak driver
Kyocera KM-1635/KM-2035                foo2oak driver

Last edited by DrLove73; 11-03-2009 at 03:48 AM.
 
Old 10-31-2009, 08:12 PM   #14
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,485
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902Reputation: 2902
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLove73 View Post
I have yet to find time to learn and actually GPG packages.
Not that hard:
0) set yourself up with an email address that is publicly available and that people can use,
1) generate a new GnuPG key pair for that email address: 'gpg --gen-key',
2) export the key: 'gpg --export --armor 'gpguser' > /tmp/RPM-GPG-KEY-YOURREPONAME (and now people can import that key with 'rpm --import /tmp/RPM-GPG-KEY-YOURREPONAME'),
3) upload the public part to any known PGP signature server (pgp.mit.edu, keyserver.rutgers.edu, etc),
4) Now use '--sign' when building packages or '--addsign' when signing already built packages.

Note there's also "%_gpg*" macros for use in your .rpmmacros file. Also see How to sign your custom RPM package with GPG Key and don't forget to check the references at the bottom of that page.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 03:33 AM   #15
DrLove73
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Srbobran, Serbia
Distribution: CentOS 5.5 i386 & x86_64
Posts: 1,118
Blog Entries: 1

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
OK. I made and uploaded GPG key, I now have to actually sign the packages and update plnet-release package.

Last edited by DrLove73; 11-03-2009 at 05:11 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RHEL/CentOS repo structure creedog Linux - Enterprise 9 06-20-2009 09:48 AM
fedora 9 repo on centos 5.2 ssilayaraja Linux - Server 1 09-10-2008 12:36 PM
CentOS 5.2 & Livina like Repo zcrxsir88 Linux - Server 1 08-12-2008 06:02 PM
Difficulty Adding ATRPMS Repo to Yumex Under CentOS 5 Linux31 Red Hat 6 04-17-2008 01:24 PM
yum update problem, centos 4.92 repo no longer available parv Linux - Distributions 3 04-15-2007 07:10 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:12 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration