October 2005 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Packaging advice
by David Bolt 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

I've written spec files for a few packages that weren't available for SUSE, purely picked at random, just to see how well I can do at producing packages. The packages I've built successfully build on all SUSE versions from 9.0 to 10.0, although I don't foresee any problems building them on the 10.1 alphas/betas. What I'd like is for someone who's rather more experienced at packaging, which wouldn't take much really, to have a look at the spec files and see if there's anything that could be done to improve things[0]. At present I've copied the spec files and source RPMs to the free web-space provided by my ISP. Unfortunately, due to lack of space, I haven't been able to copy any of the pre-build packages. I would have hosted them on my home server, but that's on the end of a 256Kbps up-link that's presently pretty close to saturation (limited to ~80-90%) due to me keeping the 10.0, 10.0 delta[1] and 10.1alpha2 torrents running. The specs and source RPMs are presently located at: <URL:http://www.davjam.demon.co.uk/srpms/> Any suggestions, hints, tips, criticism, etc. (gratefully?) received. [0] I've already started using "install -D ..." in place of "mkdir -p" and "install ..." although, in some instances, it's failed to work in some instances so I've had to use "mkdir" and "install" [1] Not sure why I've still got the delta torrent still running as there doesn't seem to be many people either sharing or downloading the deltas. Regards, David Bolt -- Member of Team Acorn checking nodes at 50 Mnodes/s: http://www.distributed.net/ AMD1800 1Gb WinXP/SuSE 9.3 | AMD1300 512Mb SuSE 9.0 | AMD2400 256Mb SuSE 9.0 AMD2400 160Mb SuSE 10.0 | Falcon 14Mb TOS 4.02 | STE 4Mb TOS 1.62 RPC600 129Mb RISCOS 3.6 | A3010 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 | A4000 4Mb RISCOS 3.11

5 5

Packager communication + teamwork (was: mplayerplug-in)
by Pascal Bleser 07 Nov '05

07 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 James Ogley wrote: >> in the moment, Rainer Lay hasn't much time, so i'll try to "fix" missing rpms >> for 10.0. mplayerplug-in is now online on packman. ;) > > Cool, I've removed my packages now. > Teamwork - it's a beautiful thing :) Well, as I said/wrote again and again, it definately shows that we've been lacking a common communication media. Duplicate packages, recurring issues, maybe discussing over common style/guidelines for spec files, etc... At least that's the kind of things I hope we'll be able to talk about in some time (or maybe right now). We definately need to work much closer together. Most specifically, having duplicate packages is a big issue: 1) often they're not compatible and/or conflict: different package name, different subpackaging, ... 2) issues for end-user who have several repositories in their inst sources That's certainly the worst issue of them all, as we all want to give end-users a good experience and easy of use, without what we wouldn't do all this packaging stuff ;) 3) duplicated work Partly wasted time and effort for us packagers - and time sure is a valuable resource for all of us. This also means that we should keep this list clear from any support question ("yast gives me an error when I try to do a netinstall"-alikes). Package-related bug reports.. hmm... why not. Someone from SUSE mentioned that we could also use the openSUSE bugzilla to report issues about our "community-made" packages. I don't remember who it was... Adrian, AJ, Christoph... ? I would have a proposal: every time one of us makes a new package (not a new release, but start packaging a project you didn't do before), send a mail on this list. Like that, if someone else already packages/maintains it, we/they can discuss who maintains it, in order to avoid duplication. What do you guys think ? Feasible ? Too much overhead ? Also, when we find out about cool RPM/spec tricks, gotchas, bugs, tools, scripts, whatever, publicize it here. This list can also be used to extend our know-how. If some information is considered interesting or important enough to be "sticky", we can write it on the opensuse wiki. If noone is against it, I'll start doing so right now. What about everyone maintaining a public repository introducing himself here ? - - shortly - - what repository do you maintain (suser-guru, usr-local-bin, packman, suser-gbv, ...) - - what kind of software in your repo (anything, multimedia, server stuff, ...) - - what SUSE versions do you build for - - repo URLs/formats - - email address, jabber ID, ... Or maybe a page on the opensuse wiki ? cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDX05Sr3NMWliFcXcRAo0VAJ42bRQvrIjNfl+gxh3UEDBBouuJ0ACfZCr6 SUDyfdtnlZwyXvHPUBcUHxM= =YAFG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

13 15

New package: k9copy
by Detlef Reichelt 31 Oct '05

31 Oct '05

http://packman.links2linux.de/?action=687 Detlef

1 0

dot desktop files: run as root (KDE/GNOME)
by Pascal Bleser 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi This time I have a question ;) I quite often package up apps that have to run as root (e.g. smart, aptitude, ...), including console applications. I almost always add a .desktop file to have it appear in the users' menu (even though it's a console app). Now, my question... For KDE I found out somehow (it's not documented *anywhere*) that when you add the following two lines to your .desktop file, it will prompt the user to enter the root password (using kdesu) and then run as root: X-KDE-SubstituteUID=true X-KDE-Username=root Is this the right way to do it ? And what about GNOME ? Given the X-KDE- prefix, it only applies to KDE. What tags do I have to add to a .desktop file to force an "su" (gnomesu, whatever) to the root user? James, you should know that .. ? ;) cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDY4iFr3NMWliFcXcRAkN+AJ91/jw49gcxYvc2AGFir5RSxrenAwCgl8bI U7Y5n0wI2JcGnzGTNEf1wNU= =NoUf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Package naming & versioning (release 2 :-)
by R Hannes Beinert 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

[Apologies for my previous truncated email :-] Hello! I was curious if there is any standard (ad hoc, or otherwise) for package naming, and the spec file version/release information which includes provisions for (1) tagging the provenance of an rpm to a particular packager/repo, and (2) still allows for rpm-based installers to understand the proper package relationships. Specifically, my understanding of existing packging conventions (in part derived from practice, and in part derived from the SuSE Package Conventions document) a package consists of: <packagename>-<version>-<release>.<arch>.rpm where, <version> ::= <major version>.<minor version>{.<other stuff>} <release> ::= <release number>[.<release version>] and, it seems by convention, <major version> ::= Usually a number <minor version> ::= Usually a number <release number> ::= Always a number, set to zero on version update <release version> ::= Always a number, set to zero on release update However, within the spec file, if the release-tag has additional information regarding the rpm provenance, such as Pascal's convention of using "package-v.v-r.guru.distro.arch.rpm" where the release-tag is, for example, "1.guru.suse90" -- can rpm installers still typically track package sequences? The SuSE Package Conventions document implies a stricter standard for the release-tag. If a more informative release-tag is used, would it then be advisable to use the serial-tag? Or is that tag now deprecated, or ignored by rpm installation software? On a related matter, what are the most portable conventions for package naming and specifying version/release information? Thanks! Hannes. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com

1 0

Package naming & versioning
by R Hannes Beinert 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

Hello! I was curious if there is any standard (ad hoc, or otherwise) for package naming, and the spec file version/release information which includes provisions for (1) tagging the provenance of an rpm to a particular packager/repo, and (2) still allows for rpm-based installers to understand the proper package relationships. Specifically, my understanding of existing packging conventions (in part derived from practice, and in part derived from the SuSE Package Conventions document) a package consists of: <packagename>-<version>-<release>.<arch>.rpm where, <version> ::= <major version>.<minor version>{.<other stuff>} <release> ::= <release number>[.<release version>] and, it seems by convention, <major version> <minor version> <release number> <release version> are numbers. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Common naming scheme for KDE styles, windecos, ...
by Pascal Bleser 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Something I've been running into again and again... Could we discuss having a common naming scheme for KDE styles and windeco packages ? e.g. kde3-style-..., kde3-windeco-... IMHO it's better to prefix the package name like that instead of just using the project name alone. e.g. "kde3-style-kurses" instead of just "kurses" Comments, please ;) cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDYWZMr3NMWliFcXcRAg6vAKCO8vzSCrwPkq3JkMYRqDlFR1gNvgCdF1Iu c9rP4P+lMc98cEdv3ajUDSg= =lap7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: [opensuse] rpmbuild screws up install path with mythtv]
by Guðlaugur Jóhannesson 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

Originally posted on opensuse but I thought packagers might better be able to help me. Sorry for multi posting. Anders Johansson wrote: > The Makefile for mythtv is highly screwy. For one thing, it doesn't respect > DESTDIR or anything like that, you'll need to change it to make it work with > rpmbuild I agree with that and I am changing it now. The problem, however, is that calling qmake (qt3 version) from rpmbuild results in weird behavior with both the prefix and some include paths. It seems that qmake changes some instances of the /usr directory to ../../../../../../ when called from rpmbuild. It does not do that with the qt4 version or when manually calling the qt3 version. Could this be a bug with qmake from qt3? -- Guðlaugur Jóhannesson http://www.hi.is/~gudlaugu Tel: 849 8405 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-help(a)opensuse.org -- Guðlaugur Jóhannesson http://www.hi.is/~gudlaugu Tel: 849 8405

2 2

New package: konzept
by Herbert Graeber 27 Oct '05

27 Oct '05

I start building konzept for packman (x86_64 und i586). herbert

2 1

suser-guru: new packages
by Pascal Bleser 27 Oct '05

27 Oct '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ok, eating my own dogfood ;) - - amarok 1.3.5: not a new package but a new release.. just in case, is anyone else packaging that ? - - kurses 0.1: a minimalistic KDE3 widget style - - stellarium 0.7.1: new package, had several requests for that one - - metamonitor 0.2: /var/log/messages monitor systray, very early stages - - kasound 0.5_0.2: configuration frontend for alsa/.asoundrc If anyone else packages one of those, please shout. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDX/ujr3NMWliFcXcRArm2AKCckIFQUvXXhNZFW5hHHp6EFmAgRQCgpA4O vHKu8Jlf8+3IRbn+O1LVM2U= =ZVmk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 4

New packages: tango-icon-theme and icon-naming-utils
by James Ogley 27 Oct '05

27 Oct '05

About to add tango-icon-theme and icon-naming-utils (which it requires) to usr-local-bin. Both are noarch. There's one patch to vanilla Tango, which is to make it inherit Industrial icons as well as gnome & crystalsvg. -- James Ogley james(a)usr-local-bin.org Packages for SUSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms Make Poverty History: http://makepovertyhistory.org

1 2

New package: gnome-menu-editor
by James Ogley 26 Oct '05

26 Oct '05

Well, here's a start to Pascal's idea for new packages being announced here. :) I'm about to upload gnome-menu-editor packages (10.0/i586 and 10.0/i686) - don't think anyone else currently packages this, but if you do, please shout. James -- James Ogley james(a)usr-local-bin.org Packages for SUSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms Make Poverty History: http://makepovertyhistory.org

1 0

mplayerplug-in
by James Ogley 26 Oct '05

26 Oct '05

I've packaged up mplayerplug-in and uploaded it to usr-local-bin (latest version). If the PackMan crew package it (as has been the case in the past), could they let me know, and I'll pull my package. Cheers -- James Ogley james(a)usr-local-bin.org Packages for SUSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms Make Poverty History: http://makepovertyhistory.org

2 2

Legal issues for packagers
by Marcel Hilzinger 16 Oct '05

16 Oct '05

Suggestion What about making a special repo for legally grey-zone packages? I'd like to put packman, guru and other packages on our CDs /DVDs often, but have to sort them out the heavily. You want your repos to be included in OpenSUSE, so that users just have to klick to enable the installation source. With a special repo for all the half-legal and illegal stuff (e.g on a server in a non-EU country, like Switzerland ;-), live would perhaps be easyier and safer. Best regards, Marcel

6 9

packages-Format Documentation?
by Rauch Christian 16 Oct '05

16 Oct '05

Hi List! I wonder if there is any documentation available on how the packages, packages.DU, packages.en and so on are structured. I already understood a bit of these, but i'm hanging on some entrys. Thanks, -rauch

7 15

The beginning of a repo
by houghi 15 Oct '05

15 Oct '05

I am looking into the building of a repository. At least for some scripts I have written. The results can be looked at at http://www.houghi.org/suse/10.0/ and RPMS being the repo. Best don't use it as a fixed point, because it will probably be moving a lot. Only three programs till now that I have made into RPMs thusfar. makeSUSEdvd (obviously), mx is another script I wrote and grepm, something I did not write myself. At this moment I am concentrating on the making of an RPM and placing all correctly. So I take just scripts and not something that needs compiling. One step at a time. To do all this, I wrote a script. It would not be me if I would not do something with a script. :-) This is how I (together with the script) work. I copy Development/skeleton/Latest to Development/script/Latest and change the files inside Development/script/Latest to whatever I like. No yet all very sofisticated, but the basis of how I think I should work is there. Now my question. Could somebody look at it and tell me wether this is the good direction or if I amaking an arse of myself. I rather have it told to me when I am at the beginning, then when I am at the end. Changing things now is easy. Both at the way of working as well as the spec files, donated by somebody else, I must say. I know there are a lot of HOWTO's and README's and I still would like an honest opinion. I will treat any criticism as positive. Again, if you use it as a fixed instalation source, don't come crying if it is gone in a few hours, days, weeks or whatever. :-) houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

9 13

Wanting to start packaging
by Dylan 14 Oct '05

14 Oct '05

Hi all, Having read the thread about packaging on the main list, I figure it's something I can turn my hand to. I have a few queries though... A - Is there a system for making sure there aren't multiple (possibly conflicting) rpms of the same app? B - Is space available for uploading the rpms, or do we need to sort that out ourselves? Cheers Dylan -- "The man who strikes first admits that his ideas have given out." (Chinese Proverb)

7 6

php5
by Kusmayadi - 13 Oct '05

13 Oct '05

is there any php5 rpm for suse 10?

4 3

Consolidate yast sw_single and online_update?
by James Ogley 13 Oct '05

13 Oct '05

Just a thought that had been going through my head over the weekend... At the moment on OpenSUSE.org, we provide a link on the Download page to the information on external YaST repositories, and there has been talk of making some of them available in YaST as an option in future versions.[1] Thing is that that's for sw_single and the same doesn't also apply for online_update - it can only have one source of packages at a time, and to say to users: "Sometimes you will want to run the Online Update option in YaST to get the latest updates, but sometimes you'll want to run the Software Management option is little counter-intuitive.[2] I would like to suggest it be consolidated into a single component that handles adding and removing packages, as well as updating from all YaST sources, and SUSE update trees. That's all I'm going to say about it now, any thoughts? In fact, is anyone else on this list? ;) [1] Note that those external repositories need to be set to refresh on YaST startup. [2] This has come out of the fact that I'm going to be setting up "OSS" for some friends, and I've gone through exactly this thought process before giving them the CDs. -- James Ogley james(a)usr-local-bin.org Packages for SUSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms Make Poverty History: http://makepovertyhistory.org

4 4

Re: [opensuse] openSUSE packagers
by Pascal Bleser 13 Oct '05

13 Oct '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Simon Crute wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2005 06:19, Pascal Bleser wrote: >> Because that's just not true at all. Most Redhat/Fedora/Mandriva/whatever >> RPMs won't work on SUSE Linux, because each distribution has its own >> idiosyncrasies about where to install certain files (*), the names of the >> libraries (dependencies) (**), the available versions of libraries >> (dependencies) (***), how to configure and run daemons (****), etc... ... > Tell me about it !! > I've managed to port the mythTV PRMs from redhat to suse9.3, (and nearly 10) > and I'm while I'm sure they're not pretty, they seem to work OK. I'm > interested in helping out with Myth related stuff (and other things) when I > have the time. If you want to, I can have a look at the spec file. Or you could just post the .spec file on the opensuse-packaging list and have a few people give you feedback about it ;) > Interestingly, the packer for myth on atrpms is very interested in providing > suse RPMs too. And it looks like (at least with myth) once you diff the spec Yes, there are interested people, definately. Some folks at RPMforge are as well, especially Dag Wieers (he runs this very small, unknown package repository with Fedora RPMs: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/apt/ (yes, that's 38000 packages for 2200 projects)). > files, the same diff will keep on working. At least when there's only minor > version changes. :-) We can make a .spec file that works on both and which detects at build time whether it's on SUSE Linux or whatever, and makes appropriate choices. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDTfXsr3NMWliFcXcRAtTrAKCJD+aIu51ACxxtFPZw4h5+VQ4ORwCfTWdu 9B0BLs8CWFGMKTLyvnY51yU= =7nhe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

A presentation and a sugestion
by Guillermo Ballester Valor 11 Oct '05

11 Oct '05

Hello, I'm Guillermo Ballester Valor. I began many time ago to write my own rpms (for suse distro). First it was for fun, then I asked me whether those rpm could be useful for others and so I create my own apt repository. This was first hosted in my own home computer. Because I built many popular rpms ( amsn, amule ...) my narrow ADSL bandwith began to be saturated and I asked for help in the suse list. Hapily, I receive help from two persons, one was Radu Voicu who is mirroring my repo at ftp://ftp.ploiesti.rdsnet.ro/pub/mirrors/ftp.oxixares.com/rpms and the other was the team Richard Boss /Eberhard Moenkeberg who offered me the possibitlty to create a repo in gwdg.de site. And 'suser-gbv' repos start its life. I would like to build rpms for X86_64 but I can't at the moment because I haven't access to a x86_64 system. I have planned to buy one many times but always found other better (and urgent) way to spend the money, you know. At this point, I'm wondering whether SuSE/Nowell can give access to some suser's to build the rpms in any of its machines. I'm not sure about the posibility to do that without root access, but I would be a big help for some of packager guys (as me). I'm not suggesting a compilation farm, which is oriented to the development. I'm meaning some rpm-builder machines. This would have also the advantage to build in machines with standard configuration/packages in it. What do you think? Guillermo -- Guillermo Ballester Valor gbv(a)oxixares.com Ogijares, Granada SPAIN Public GPG KEY http://www.oxixares.com/~gbv/pubgpg.html #################################################### See World Weather Navigator at http://www.ogimet.com ####################################################

2 3

CommonC++ vs commoncpp2
by Richard Bos 11 Oct '05

11 Oct '05

I just discovered that suse included CommonC++ instead of commoncpp2. The latter is the successor of the former. The package is included for the SIP client Twinkle. As a new version of Twinkle has been released I encountered a dependency problem. My spec file tells me, to use commoncpp2 iso CommonC++. Is there any reason that suse included CommonC++? How to deal with this one (of course I can open a bug report, but perhaps there is new way now we have opensuse and 10.1 in development). ps: commoncpp2 and friends have been build and will be available via the apt repository. -- Richard

1 0

Smart package manager: call for testers
by Pascal Bleser 09 Oct '05

09 Oct '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi fellow packagers Maybe you've run into smart already: http://smartpm.org It's a multi-backend, multi-format package installer, very similar to y2pmsh, apt{-get,-shell} and yum. Completely written in Python (and, hence, doesn't require apt or yum to be installed - it does need RPM though). It currently supports yum and apt repositories (no YaST2 (yet?)). Written by Gustavo Niemeyer, who maintained apt-rpm. It's definately the tool that will replace apt (and maybe even yum) once it is stable. I maintain SUSE RPMs (10.0 => 9.0) for it, so if you're willing to give it a try: http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/rpm-navigation.php?cat=System/smart/ http://ftp4.gwdg.de/pub/linux/misc/suser-guru/rpm/packages/System/smart/ (latest smart 0.40 (released today) will be available there tomorrow morning (GMT+1)) x86_64 builds kindly provided by Detlef Reichelt (member of the Packman team) in his repository: http://ftp4.gwdg.de/pub/linux/misc/suser-drcux/ (SUSE 10.0 and 9.3) It's still work in progress, although it works for me (tm) ;) Make sure to submit bugs to Gustavo (bugtracker on smartpm.org) and me, especially if you suspect packaging issues. He's very reactive and provides patches really quickly. Actually he's employed to work full-time on smart, as he was previously at Connectiva. Generally speaking, if you use it, please submit your feedback over here as well, I think it could be interesting for everyone. It comes preconfigured with my "guru" and packman repositories, but that's something I inject into my smart RPM package, which means I can add others as well. It also has a simple but nice GTK2 GUI (requires python-gtk), almost exactly looking like synaptic. Definately worth trying and improving. There don't seem to be many testers on SUSE just yet (even looks like I'm the only one ;)). I prefer to submit this on the packager list at the moment, but I'll make a call for testers on the main list later on. And once it is stable, I'm sure we'll find someone who's willing to implement a YaST2 repository backend ;) cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDREuor3NMWliFcXcRAl5HAJ4lrInPUqM0g3njjXnRQW/GctqBLQCfVbEK fNrTPiBolqm0IhlKdu8hgHA= =BXg0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

Repositories
by houghi 08 Oct '05

08 Oct '05

This is already posted on the main list, but perhaps it drowns there. Sitution is that people (three thus far) are unable to install anything from the software available on mirrors or anywhere else, or see the wrong info. I have added ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/distribution/SL-10.0-OSS/inst-source/ as source. I want to install k3b-arts (Tried other packages as well) wich is available at ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/distribution/SL-10.0-OSS/inst-source/suse/i586/k3b-arts-0.12.3-9.i586.rpm I so a search and am unable to see it. Somebody else tried opensp-devel and also nothing and yet another who can not find the correct packages on Packman. Not sure if this is related, but I first want to know if anything is up, or should I just file a bug? houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

2 1

Keeping WiKi up to date
by houghi 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

I have not looked if the page http://www.opensuse.org/Additional_YaST_Package_Repositories is up to date. It would be nice if everybody who has a repository will once in a while look at http://www.opensuse.org/Additional_YaST_Package_Repositories and see if their part is up to date. e.g. 10.1 added, 10.0-betaX removed e.g. the SUPER info seems not to be correct. Again, could be that all the rest is correct. Just a reminder to ask everybody to just look at their own data. Thanks for this and all the rest you are doing for the SUSE comunity. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

2 2