On Wednesday 21 May 2008 01:00:58 Linda Walsh wrote:

Um...where would I, or should I have been able to find a pointer to the sources from the wiki? The name "SL-OSS-factory" looks like it would mean "SuSELinux-OpenSourceSoftware-factor" -- where my guess for 'factor' would have been the last version that was released to manufacturing (for shipment).... How do I get from 11.0 (development) Beta 2 or Beta 3 -> this source dir?

Uh...or have I been asleep at the switch again...oh..uhoh... has suse 11.0 been released or what is shipping? Gulp...thanks much!

No, it's not shipping yet :) "factory" is what will become the next version. As soon as 11.0 is released, it will start progressing towards 11.1. For now though, factory is what will eventually become 11.0, so right now it is beta3 + whatever updates have been made since that was released for instructions on how to get it, you could have gone to http://en.opensuse.org/Download (which is linked from the main page of the opensuse wiki as "download instructions) from there, click on "development version", and then item 4.1 on that page is "sources", which links to the repo I gave you Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2008-05-20 at 17:22 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:

I followed the general flow in "Part B", above, but from the "<Get it>" link on opensuse.org. I then went to the "<Latest Development Version>" link from there, but that's were I got lost -- couldn't find a source link. Is there someone I would forward this "suggestion" (and my explanation of how I got lost) to? Also...I dunno...but if the "pun" under How to Proceed was supposed to be a hint...but ...errrg...if it was, someone should be strung up by little toes while being forced to watch British stand-up "humour"... :-).... Linda...

http://en.opensuse.org/Download look at the "Release Table", the row "openSUSE Factory", last column (how to get), there is a link for "internet installation pointing to <http://en.opensuse.org/Development_Version#Factory_Tree>, and there, there is a table: openSUSE Factory Internet Installation Repository Sources <======================== Mirrors Development Build Network/Internet Installation Boot ISO Another method: http://en.opensuse.org/Download section "Development Version", link labeled: "Download the latest development build" points to <http://en.opensuse.org/Development_Version>. Search for sources, there is a section named "sources". ....

Other developer downloads Installation from DVD/CD: Step-by-step installation guide

Please say it isn't so ...(groaning)...I thought it meant other resources and the 's' was left off. But now I see that SOURCE is in all caps...so the pun was to be a hint? :-) *arrgg* I'm suffering in pain at the thought...

Shhh! It's a secret. We factory users are a secret club for members only, with information restricted on what you do need to know basis. :-P It's a wiki page, somethings are easier to find than others, and many people intervene. Another method, without the wiki: You simply open the ftp browser to one of the mirrors known to keep all repos (for instance, gwdg). Under "/pub/opensuse/distribution/" there are several branches: 10.2, 10.3, SL-OSS-factory, and others. Just explore the SL-OSS-factory tree, for instance, and there you will find everything, including the sources. See? It is in the same place as the sources for all the active distros... the only thing to know is that not all mirrors carry everything. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIM3qXtTMYHG2NR9URAtNiAJ46zPY3juBg+DvnJTGkgHDfAMtXtgCeIM69 R7C15Hx2otzlHcAymzHT2/Q= =tf90 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Am Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2008 01:00:58 schrieb Linda Walsh:

        Uh...or have I been asleep at the switch again...oh..uhoh... has suse 11.0 been released or what is shipping?  Gulp...thanks much! Hi Linda,

you can take a look at http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_11.0 OS11 should be released in 28 days. Greetings Michael

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2008-05-21 at 20:31 -0500, Kevin Dupuy wrote:

Wow. Even though I've been following the development of openSUSE 11.0, I still can't believe it's almost here. Maybe I just got used to the long dev cycle of 10.2 -> 10.3.

It is the same cycle. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFINTKUtTMYHG2NR9URAq68AJ9qbs9mR2AlkBu98Fj6vOtM3N/TRwCggEjB UaWwawsOCssHRErsqm9xWag= =qsl+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Linda Walsh escribió:

...

Where would I find the suse 11.0 pre-release source packages?

Am looking to upgrade my "open-ssh" to 4.7 and am hoping it's already in the 11.x tree -- I have a patch for high-speed ssh, that applies

If you do so, you need to recompile openSSH, and possible other...

You mean to patch open-ssh, I need to recompile the source packages? Uh...*ow*...(sorry, just bit my tongue)... Sorry, I can't say more right now, don't trust myself.

components, I strongly suggest you not to do that, messing with applications that contains crypto code can become **very** tricky.

At SUSE, people avoid doing such things, for very good reasons, even those who have extensive knowledge in the area.

You have been warned ;-P

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Linda Walsh escribió:

...

Where would I find the suse 11.0 pre-release source packages?

Am looking to upgrade my "open-ssh" to 4.7 and am hoping it's already in the 11.x tree -- I have a patch for high-speed ssh, that applies

If you do so, you need to recompile openSSH, and possible other components, I strongly suggest you not to do that, messing with applications that contains crypto code can become **very** tricky.

At SUSE, people avoid doing such things, for very good reasons, even those who have extensive knowledge in the area.

You have been warned ;-P

Did you not understand what I was trying to do? Or, I guess I don't understand why you are trying to warn me away from doing what is done in the linux open-source world all the time. I said I was downloading a *source* package, so it's seems like knowing that one has to build from source is a given -- yet you warn about the need to 'recompile' openssh? That's a bit confusing. I also mentioned that I had a patch (standard linux patch composed of the output of "diff -u") that I needed to apply to a version, *higher* than the one included in 10.3. The patch for High performance scp/ssh is from: "http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/". Did you not understand? I.e. -- you seemed to be warning me away from rebuilding openssh -- which I would think would be required for any patch to be applied. Am I missing something or was I unclear about what I was trying to do? Am not sure why you would be pushing customers away from building their own versions of packages that they need for their systems. Isn't that one of the main 'selling points' of Open Source? If you could explain your concerns (or were you trying to be humorous and I missed the ":-)" ), as your concerns seem confusing for someone working at an open-source distribution company (I wouldn't find it so surprising coming from someone a closed or proprietary software company like microsoft, but SuSE ain't them...:-)). Thanks L -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Joe Morris wrote:

I believe his warning isn't so much just the need to rebuild openssh, it is that there are many OTHER packages that are built against the libraries in openssh, which all may need to be rebuilt against the newer version of openssh. It can be a dependency nightmare of sorts. ..... I think you are missing how many other programs use openssh and link against its libraries. Changing it may mean rebuilding a lot of other programs, which may rebuild with the newer openssh, or may introduce problems related to a newer version.

---- If I was installing the 11.0 "binary" packages, I'd agree that I might have problems -- especially if package requirements have specific versions of libraries that are needed -- but USUALLY, third party packages that are build from "tarballs" using "Configure" and 'automake' are designed to build against the libraries on your system. It is almost never the case that packages build against specific versions of files. The most likely dependency is against another "package". The next most likely is one that says the package must be >= to some minimum version. Unless there have been major feature changes in a product, most don't require upgrading packages.

...

Am not sure why you would be pushing customers away from building their own versions of packages that they need for their systems. Isn't that one of the main 'selling points' of Open Source?

This is true, but replacing a brick at the foundation is a lot more different than one at the top.

This one is a matter of perspective. openssh, in my view is a brick at the top of the wall. I'm not replacing *underlying* libraries. It's the "top-most" application -- it doesn't provide libraries for other applications -- it provides command line utils (and a server). That command line interface is pretty *stable*... But I'm aware of dealing with the low-level bricks -- I regularly build my on kernel from the vanilla sources and configure them for my machines -- if that isn't replacing one of the "low level bricks..." :-)... Lots of software in "user-space" depends on functionality in the kernel -- there are multiple features in SuSE's standard kernel that aren't in the vanilla kernel. Utilities, and startup scripts above the kernel that assume they are running on a SuSE kernel need to be "addressed". While it isn't a "slam-dunk", I figure that if I can replace the bottom-most bricks (like the kernel), I should have some possibility of successfully dealing with a top-level application like openssh...:-) But I never know until I try...:-) Software gets more complex and twisted all the time, so there may come a day...*sniff*...*I'll cry & whine*...:-) But *if it is important to me*, I'll get back up and try to figure out why what broke, broke. :-)

I can only guess at what CR was implying, but I believe I understood him correctly. It isn't that it cannot be done, but openssh, openssl, etc. are used in a lot of other packages. I have attempted similar things in the past and can understand what he is warning about, i.e. you want a newer <?>, but 10 package need xxx.so.1, but the newer has xxx.so.2

This is a very rare case if you are building from source -- though it is *very* true if you try to install binary packages from different revisions -- but unless the new program (binary or source) relies on new library calls that didn't exist before, specific version dependencies are usually "invalid".

all 10 packages now need to be rebuilt,

Have never had a source package require packages to be rebuilt -- I know it's possible, but in 10 years of linux development, I've never needed to. Most 3rd-party packages use "configure" or something similar -- which checks the machine you are on and builds the product to your machine -- never to specific file versions (product versions may have minimums, but files versions are (I hate to use this word...but...) never required in 3rd party packages -- because they are designed to build on multiple platforms where file-versions are often to be completely different. but even after rebuilding

(assuming they all rebuild), there is strangeness that wasn't there previously, and now you need to figure out if it is the relation between one of the 10 to the new library, or the new library itself, etc. It isn't trivial. It can be done, but it takes work, and thus his warning. HTH.

The warning is not that applicable to source rebuilding. There is *some* validity -- like the new openssh -- IF compiled with the krb-gssapi option, makes some "new" call, but the easy work-around there was to not include krb-gssapi in my build -- I don't use it. Problem solved. In fact -- that's been the most common type of conflict in bringing later-versioned rpm-src packages into an earlier version -- teh newer version uses some software or hardware feature that I'm not using, don't have and usually don't want. So, I remove the *added* complexity and the resulting software is usually more reliable, smaller and faster. Those are all good benefits that offset hassles of identifying and removing new "requirements" (which are, _more often than not_, "bogus"). Like gssapi -- that was a government led protocol that has since been deprecated (security problems with the protocol). So not only do I not need it for my systems, but I really wouldn't want it. It 'should' be, IMO, deprecated in SuSE as well if not just 'removed'...but there could be some customer...so whatever... Thanks for the concern and feed back though.... Linda -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org