FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-04-2009, 07:40 AM
"Robert P. J. Day"
 
Default proper protocol for installing a *really* new package?

what is the proper approach to install on centos 5.4 a package
that's newer than the currently supported one? at the moment, AFAICT,
the latest "poppler-utils" package for centos is 0.5.4. however, the
source is up to version 0.12:

http://poppler.freedesktop.org/

which matches the current fedora version, but that's not surprising
since, naturally, fedora zips right along keeping up with that sort of
thing.

however, i have a case where it's important that a newer version of
poppler-utils (and, consequently) poppler be installed on a centos 5.4
box. someone has claimed he's done it by (gack! choke!) installing
the fedora package. that just creeps me out. in any case, what would
be the proper solution under centos? is there a "rawhide"/dev
equivalent for centos? thanks.

rday
--

================================================== ======================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
================================================== ======================
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-04-2009, 10:40 AM
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
 
Default proper protocol for installing a *really* new package?

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> what is the proper approach to install on centos 5.4 a package
> that's newer than the currently supported one? at the moment, AFAICT,
> the latest "poppler-utils" package for centos is 0.5.4. however, the
> source is up to version 0.12:
>
> http://poppler.freedesktop.org/
>
> which matches the current fedora version, but that's not surprising
> since, naturally, fedora zips right along keeping up with that sort of
> thing.
>
> however, i have a case where it's important that a newer version of
> poppler-utils (and, consequently) poppler be installed on a centos 5.4
> box. someone has claimed he's done it by (gack! choke!) installing
> the fedora package. that just creeps me out. in any case, what would
> be the proper solution under centos? is there a "rawhide"/dev
> equivalent for centos? thanks.

You could get an SRPM from fedora and tryo to "rpmbuild --rebuild" it.
Since poppler is a library, you may have to also rebuild any packages
that depend on it (evince, poppler-utils and xfig on my system, maybe
others on yours).
You should do this as non-root, check out the centos wiki and list
archive for details on that.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-04-2009, 11:11 AM
"Robert P. J. Day"
 
Default proper protocol for installing a *really* new package?

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:

> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > what is the proper approach to install on centos 5.4 a package
> > that's newer than the currently supported one? at the moment,
> > AFAICT, the latest "poppler-utils" package for centos is 0.5.4.
> > however, the source is up to version 0.12:
> >
> > http://poppler.freedesktop.org/
> >
> > which matches the current fedora version, but that's not
> > surprising since, naturally, fedora zips right along keeping up
> > with that sort of thing.
> >
> > however, i have a case where it's important that a newer
> > version of poppler-utils (and, consequently) poppler be installed
> > on a centos 5.4 box. someone has claimed he's done it by (gack!
> > choke!) installing the fedora package. that just creeps me out.
> > in any case, what would be the proper solution under centos? is
> > there a "rawhide"/dev equivalent for centos? thanks.
>
> You could get an SRPM from fedora and tryo to "rpmbuild --rebuild"
> it. Since poppler is a library, you may have to also rebuild any
> packages that depend on it (evince, poppler-utils and xfig on my
> system, maybe others on yours). You should do this as non-root,
> check out the centos wiki and list archive for details on that.

oh, i've built my share of rpms from source on fedora, that's not a
problem. i'm just thinking of possible dependency issues. given how
much newer the source rpm would be, i can only imagine what that new
binary rpm might need in the way of newer dependencies that don't even
exist under centos.

i'll give it a shot and see what happens. thanks.

rday
--

================================================== ======================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
================================================== ======================
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-04-2009, 04:56 PM
Frank Cox
 
Default proper protocol for installing a *really* new package?

On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 07:11 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > what is the proper approach to install on centos 5.4 a package
> > > that's newer than the currently supported one?

I don't know if it's the "proper procedure", but I have compiled stuff
from Fedora 11 and Fedora 12 on this Centos 5.4 machine. (geany,
fbreader, vice, buoh, etc.) I found that I can't directly rebuild the
srpm due to the different checksumming method that new Fedora uses, but
it's easy to rip the F11/12 srpm apart by right-clicking on it with
Natuilus and saying "extract". (I'm sure there is a commandline-method
to do that too but this works and I never looked into it any further
than that.)

Move the .spec file into ~/rpmbuild/SPECS and put the source into
~/rpmbuild/SOURCES. Edit the spec file if it needs any fixing, then
"rpmbuild -ba myfile.spec". You now have a native Centos 5 rpm and
srpm.

This wouldn't work with stuff that actually does have newer dependencies
than Centos provides without being more work than it's probably worth,
of course. Sylpheed is one example of this situation. Since the older
version of Sylpheed that I did find for Centos (2.0.4) doesn't have bold
text for unread message titles in the message listing window, I was
rather disappointed. My solution was to move my email into Evolution
instead.

The nice thing about recompiling F11/12 stuff on Centos is that Fedora
distributes the latest versions of stuff and almost all of the packaging
work is already done for you -- all you need to do is tear the Fedora
srpm apart and rebuild it for Centos.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:15 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org