Downgrading packages with Yast2
Hi all, Been investigating updating some components of my main 9.0 system from the 9.2 DVD BUT the upgrade must not break anything. Whilst I prefer no tweaking necessary, I realize that it might require minor tweaking from me. If I am unable to continue using an updated package I would like to downgrade ie un-install the upgraded package and revert to the working one. Does anyone know how to this via Yast2 on either the GUI or text interface? Regards -- The Little Helper ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 Licenced Windows user ========================================================================
On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 08:12, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Hi all,
Been investigating updating some components of my main 9.0 system from the 9.2 DVD BUT the upgrade must not break anything. Whilst I prefer no tweaking necessary, I realize that it might require minor tweaking from me. If I am unable to continue using an updated package I would like to downgrade ie un-install the upgraded package and revert to the working one.
Does anyone know how to this via Yast2 on either the GUI or text interface?
Regards
I do this every once in awhile. When in YaST you will the package shown in red. click on the check mark till turns into the "Z" symbol which tells YaST to install the package whether it is older, the same or newer. It is the equiv of --oldpackage. I think it will also sort out the dependencies as well. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989 SuSE since 1998 * Only reply to the list please*
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 08:12, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Hi all,
Been investigating updating some components of my main 9.0 system from the 9.2 DVD BUT the upgrade must not break anything. Whilst I prefer no tweaking necessary, I realize that it might require minor tweaking from me. If I am unable to continue using an updated package I would like to downgrade ie un-install the upgraded package and revert to the working one.
Does anyone know how to this via Yast2 on either the GUI or text interface?
Regards
I do this every once in awhile. When in YaST you will the package shown in red. click on the check mark till turns into the "Z" symbol which tells YaST to install the package whether it is older, the same or newer. It is the equiv of --oldpackage. I think it will also sort out the dependencies as well. I'm confused on my system when I get the 'Z' on a red item the caption says update.
-- The Little Helper ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 Licenced Windows user ========================================================================
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:07:01 +0200 "Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC)" <hylton@global.co.za> wrote:
I do this every once in awhile. When in YaST you will the package shown in red. click on the check mark till turns into the "Z" symbol which tells YaST to install the package whether it is older, the same or newer. It is the equiv of --oldpackage. I think it will also sort out the dependencies as well.
I'm confused on my system when I get the 'Z' on a red item the caption says update.
Something that helps me make up my mind is to click (hilite) a package in the left YaST panel, then go to the right YaST panel and position the cursor over the line for the package. A small window pops up, telling me the *level* of the package as it is currently installed in my system, and the level of the package that *would* be installed if I told YaST to go ahead with the update for that package. mikus
On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 10:07, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
I do this every once in awhile. When in YaST you will the package shown in red. click on the check mark till turns into the "Z" symbol which tells YaST to install the package whether it is older, the same or newer. It is the equiv of --oldpackage. I think it will also sort out the dependencies as well.
I'm confused on my system when I get the 'Z' on a red item the caption says update.
Yes it will say that because of the limitation of the way that YaST was programmed. It will install the older program that is on the CD/DVD install disk. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989 SuSE since 1998 * Only reply to the list please*
On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 10:07, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
I do this every once in awhile. When in YaST you will the package shown in red. click on the check mark till turns into the "Z" symbol which tells YaST to install the package whether it is older, the same or newer. It is the equiv of --oldpackage. I think it will also sort out the dependencies as well.
I'm confused on my system when I get the 'Z' on a red item the caption says update.
Yes it will say that because of the limitation of the way that YaST was programmed. It will install the older program that is on the CD/DVD install disk. So it will downgrade as opposed to upgrade my system. And it will also include any dependencies or can a newer library still be used by an
Ken Schneider wrote: older package without hassle ie recompiling? My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed. -- The Little Helper ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 Licenced Windows user ========================================================================
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 11:42, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Yes it will say that because of the limitation of the way that YaST was programmed. It will install the older program that is on the CD/DVD install disk. So it will downgrade as opposed to upgrade my system. And it will also include any dependencies or can a newer library still be used by an
Ken Schneider wrote: older package without hassle ie recompiling?
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
I am not sure of the newer libs involved you will need to test that on your own. In the past 10 days I have upgraded the kernel vi YOU and found that 3D would not work so downgraded to previous version, upgraded to KDE 3.3.2 and found to many problems I was not willing to live with so I used YaST to install the orig's from the install CD. Worked without problems. YMMV. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 * Only reply to the list please* "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 11:42, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes it will say that because of the limitation of the way that YaST was programmed. It will install the older program that is on the CD/DVD install disk.
So it will downgrade as opposed to upgrade my system. And it will also include any dependencies or can a newer library still be used by an older package without hassle ie recompiling?
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
I am not sure of the newer libs involved you will need to test that on your own. In the past 10 days I have upgraded the kernel vi YOU and found that 3D would not work so downgraded to previous version, upgraded to KDE 3.3.2 and found to many problems I was not willing to live with so I used YaST to install the orig's from the install CD. Worked without problems. YMMV. Though ^^^^ worries me, I guess the only way to know is to try.
Tnx -- ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 ========================================================================
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-20-05 13:49]:
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. Note: If you wish java support, you must have java rte installed on your system. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-20-05 13:49]:
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. Note: If you wish java support, you must have java rte installed on your system. Tnx Patrick.
It certainly eases my mind about being able to upgrade one of the two packages and not break the other. When you say they do not require lib's, I'm assuming that they do not share any common dependency files that might be changed if the program was updated, therefore allowing the reverse upgrade(downgrade)? Can I therefore assume, in a simplistic way, that if I was updating KDE from 3.1 to 3.3 they would both be affected because they rely on the X configuration being a certain way so thy can work. -- ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 ========================================================================
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-22-05 14:17]:
When you say they do not require lib's, I'm assuming that they do not share any common dependency files that might be changed if the program was updated, therefore allowing the reverse upgrade(downgrade)?
Unless you use the rpms provided by one of the SuSE repositories, there should be *no* relation to what version you are running unless you run something like galeon which relies on the mozilla package and is sensitive to version.
Can I therefore assume, in a simplistic way, that if I was updating KDE from 3.1 to 3.3 they would both be affected because they rely on the X configuration being a certain way so thy can work.
Understand what *they* say about _assume_. I don't understand where you are comming from. KDE runs on X and is dependent on X. Mozilla and OOo run on X, not the window manager which is what KDE is. Mozilla and OOo also run on Xfce, gnome, ... Perhaps you need to reconsider your question and ?? rephrase ?? Mozilla/OOo are not dependent on KDE KDE is not dependent on Mozilla/OOo (AIUI) -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-22-05 14:17]:
When you say they do not require lib's, I'm assuming that they do not share any common dependency files that might be changed if the program was updated, therefore allowing the reverse upgrade(downgrade)?
Unless you use the rpms provided by one of the SuSE repositories, there should be *no* relation to what version you are running unless you run something like galeon which relies on the mozilla package and is sensitive to version. Good
Can I therefore assume, in a simplistic way, that if I was updating KDE from 3.1 to 3.3 they would both be affected because they rely on the X configuration being a certain way so thy can work.
Understand what *they* say about _assume_. :) Whilst I might be a pain in the ass, I do not want to call you one :)
I don't understand where you are comming from. KDE runs on X and is dependent on X. Mozilla and OOo run on X, not the window manager which is what KDE is. Mozilla and OOo also run on Xfce, gnome, ...
Perhaps you need to reconsider your question and ?? rephrase ?? You basically confirmed what I thought, that by updating either of the packages *should* not affect the other as there are no shared components that the upgrade would break ie if Mozilla 1.7.2 required a common system program/library to both it and OOo to be a newer version than what was installed, but the OOo 1.1.4 could quite satisfactorily work on the older version of the system file/library, then I would upgrade OOo but not Mozilla as the newer system file/library might 'break' OOo 1.1.4.
Is that better explained/understood?
Mozilla/OOo are not dependent on KDE KDE is not dependent on Mozilla/OOo (AIUI) Is there perhaps a common system file that Mozilla and OOo share?
-- ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1 ========================================================================
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-23-05 13:15]:
:) Whilst I might be a pain in the ass, I do not want to call you one :)
your choice. I have *been* there. /cut...
Is there perhaps a common system file that Mozilla and OOo share?
There is *no* need to continue this. Check the package requirements against your installation at the web sites where the packages are provided. It is most commonly called 'System Requirements'. Mozilla requirements are available at: http://www.mozilla.org/products/mozilla1.x/sysreq.html OpenOffice: http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs.html Any and all of your questions *should* be answered and there will be no misunderstanding. Should there still be unanswered questions, please return. gud luk, -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Patrick, On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:50, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-20-05 13:49]:
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. ...
How certain are you of that? % ldd /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5/mozilla-bin linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) libmozjs.so => not found libplds4.so => not found libplc4.so => not found libnspr4.so => not found libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0x4003a000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x4004a000) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4004d000) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4029d000) libatk-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0x4030a000) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0x40324000) libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 (0x40336000) libpangox-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 (0x40357000) libpango-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0x40364000) libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0x40396000) libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0x403cc000) libglib-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x403d0000) libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x4043c000) libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/libm.so.6 (0x40538000) libstdc++.so.5 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 (0x4055a000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x40616000) libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x4061f000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000) libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0x40734000) libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 (0x40738000) libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x40740000) libXft.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 (0x4074f000) libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0x40763000) libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0x4076b000) libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0x40795000) libexpat.so.0 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 (0x407ff000)
Patrick Shanahan
Randall Schulz
* Randall R Schulz <rschulz@sonic.net> [01-22-05 14:56]:
On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:50, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. ...
How certain are you of that?
% ldd /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5/mozilla-bin linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
What does 'rpm -q mozilla' yeald on your box? -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Patrick, On Saturday 22 January 2005 12:08, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Randall R Schulz <rschulz@sonic.net> [01-22-05 14:56]:
On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:50, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. ...
How certain are you of that?
% ldd /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5/mozilla-bin linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
What does 'rpm -q mozilla' yeald on your box?
That's irrelevant to what I reported, since the Mozilla I run is not from an RPM. I run a Mozilla that I get from the Mozilla.org site (note the location of the binary) so I can stay up-to-date. However: % rpm -q mozilla mozilla-1.6-74.14 % ldd /opt/mozilla/lib/mozilla-bin linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) libmozjs.so => not found libplds4.so => not found libplc4.so => not found libnspr4.so => not found libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0x4003a000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x4004a000) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4004d000) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4029d000) libatk-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0x4030a000) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0x40324000) libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 (0x40336000) libpangox-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 (0x40357000) libpango-1.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0x40364000) libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0x40396000) libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0x403cc000) libglib-2.0.so.0 => /opt/gnome/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x403d0000) libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/libm.so.6 (0x4043c000) libstdc++.so.5 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 (0x4045e000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x4051a000) libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x40522000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000) libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x40638000) libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0x40734000) libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 (0x40738000) libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x40740000) libXft.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 (0x4074f000) libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0x40762000) libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0x4076b000) libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0x40795000) libexpat.so.0 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 (0x407ff000) I still see plenty of shared libraries there.
Patrick Shanahan
Randall Schulz
* Randall R Schulz <rschulz@sonic.net> [01-22-05 15:27]:
What does 'rpm -q mozilla' yeald on your box?
That's irrelevant to what I reported, since the Mozilla I run is not from an RPM. I run a Mozilla that I get from the Mozilla.org site (note the location of the binary) so I can stay up-to-date.
However:
% rpm -q mozilla mozilla-1.6-74.14
If not from an rpm ??? Did you build from source to rpm?? The packaged binary is a stand-alone, static entity. mozilla-1.7.5-1 mozilla-calendar-1.7.5-1 MozillaFirefox-1.0-3 -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Patrick, On Saturday 22 January 2005 12:32, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Randall R Schulz <rschulz@sonic.net> [01-22-05 15:27]:
What does 'rpm -q mozilla' yeald on your box?
That's irrelevant to what I reported, since the Mozilla I run is not from an RPM. I run a Mozilla that I get from the Mozilla.org site (note the location of the binary) so I can stay up-to-date.
However:
% rpm -q mozilla mozilla-1.6-74.14
If not from an rpm ??? Did you build from source to rpm??
The Mozilla I run, the one about which I reported first, is simply from a TAR file, manually installed. As I said, I got it from the Mozilla.org download area. The 1.6-74.14 about which I reported next is from the SuSE 9.1 installation (or updated later by YOU--I don't know 'cause it's not really relevant to me).
The packaged binary is a stand-alone, static entity.
Packaged by whom? Obtained where?
mozilla-1.7.5-1 mozilla-calendar-1.7.5-1 MozillaFirefox-1.0-3
The Firefox 1.0 I have (also manually isntalled from a TAR file) is also dynamically linked.
-- Patrick Shanahan
Randall Schulz
Randall R Schulz wrote:
Patrick,
On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:50, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-20-05 13:49]:
My biggest fear is that, as I do not know how to compile and am really a mouse tickler, I do not want to install a later version of Mozilla or OOo, find it doesn't work and then be unable to point and click to un-install it so my system is left as though I had never installed the 'offending' app. Mozilla and OOo are the two most crucial at the moment as they are helping me look for and apply for employment, and I will not have that help destroyed.
Mozilla and OOo are 'static' installations. They do not require lib's off your system. ...
How certain are you of that?
% ldd /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5/mozilla-bin....... [snip] Sorry to jump in here but the actual question still remains.
Whilst ldd does print shared library dependencies, reading the man page doesn't seem to help me determine what the command would be to create a list of files shared between OOo and Mozilla ie $ldd -v mozilla OpenOffice.org > ~/Sharedfilelist In other words: Let us assume both Mozilla and OOo share/use system file1. I now update Mozilla and it replaces file1 with file1a, as it requires a newer version. OOo now does not function as it is expecting its shared system file to be called file1 and it cannot get what it needs out of the new file 1a. Therefore the safest option, to use both programs, is to downgrade Mozilla to its previous version so that file1 is again installed and OOo can function as it should. Perhaps when the next version of OOo comes out it will support using the file1a type of file allowing both Mozilla and OOo to be upgraded as they can now both use the file1a.
Patrick Shanahan
Randall Schulz
Hylton Conacher
* Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) <hylton@global.co.za> [01-24-05 12:51]: ...
In other words: Let us assume both Mozilla and OOo share/use system file1. I now update Mozilla and it replaces file1 with file1a, as it requires a newer version. OOo now does not function as it is expecting its shared system file to be called file1 and it cannot get what it needs out of the new file 1a.
Did you research/read the system requirements for each package on the sites I provided? You *should* find your answer there. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
Hylton wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 11:47: [...]
Sorry to jump in here but the actual question still remains.
Whilst ldd does print shared library dependencies, reading the man page doesn't seem to help me determine what the command would be to create a list of files shared between OOo and Mozilla ie $ldd -v mozilla OpenOffice.org > ~/Sharedfilelist
In other words: Let us assume both Mozilla and OOo share/use system file1. I now update Mozilla and it replaces file1 with file1a, as it requires a newer version. OOo now does not function as it is expecting its shared system file to be called file1 and it cannot get what it needs out of the new file 1a.
If file1 is shared, it should be part of its own package, and therefore not updated by mozilla. If file 1 is part of mozilla, than OOo should list mozilla as a dep. So, when you update mozilla, your package manager should say "hey, mozilla needs a new version of the file1 package". Then you specify to updated the file1 package, your package manager shoudl say "hey, OOo needed an old version of file1 - you'll need to update OOo". Or, if file1 is part of mozilla, then the package manager shoudl say "hey, OOo needed an old version of mozilla". Package managers are nice - they take care of all this crap for you. If OOo depends on mozilla (man rpm - I think it's "rpm -q --requires 'packagename'"), then you might have to rebuild OOo. If you don't feel that you can evaluate what dependencies exist on your system, it's a bad idea to replace things outside of the package management system. --Danny, hoping *that* will help some
Hylton, Today's a bit of a slow day, so I've done it all for you. See below. On Monday 24 January 2005 01:08, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
Randall R Schulz wrote: ...
% ldd /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5/mozilla-bin.......
[snip] Sorry to jump in here but the actual question still remains.
Whilst ldd does print shared library dependencies, reading the man page doesn't seem to help me determine what the command would be to create a list of files shared between OOo and Mozilla ie $ldd -v mozilla OpenOffice.org > ~/Sharedfilelist
Personally, I'm finding it to be harder to find all the OOo binaries... This command will list all the non-shared object binary files (i.e., executable or object code files) in the OpenOffice.org directory hierarchy: % find /opt/OpenOffice.org/ -type f \ |xargs file \ |egrep executable \ |sed -e 's/: .*//' Make that a shell procedure that takes the base directory of the program suite as its sole argument: findBinaries() { find "$1" -type f \ |xargs file \ |egrep executable \ |sed -e 's/: .*//' } Next, use ldd and apply some sed post-processing and you'll get a list of the shared object files required: ldd executableFile \ |sed \ -e $'s/^[ \t][ \t]*.* => //' \ -e 's/ (0x[0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*)$//' \ -e $'/^[ \t]*$/d' \ -e '/not found/d' Make this filter into a shell procedure, adding "sort -u" to remove duplicates when the result of multiple invocations of "ldd" are supplied as input: lddCompact() { sed \ -e $'s/^[ \t][ \t]*.* => //' \ -e 's/ (0x[0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*)$//' \ -e $'/^[ \t]*$/d' \ -e '/not found/d' \ |sort -u } To get the list for all the shared objects used by OpenOffice.org, do this: for OOoBinary in $( findBinaries /opt/OpenOffice.org ); do ldd "$OOoBinary" done \ |lddCompact On my 9.1 system (with the KDE 3.3.2 supplementary update installed and always up-to-date via YOU) the list of shared libraries produced is: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libdl.so.2 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 /lib/libz.so.1 /lib/tls/libc.so.6 /lib/tls/libm.so.6 /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libcomphelp3gcc3.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libcppuhelpergcc3.so.3 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libcppu.so.3 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libicudata.so.22 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libicuuc.so.22 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libjvmaccessgcc3.so.3 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libpkgchk645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libpsp645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsalhelpergcc3.so.3 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsal.so.3 /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsb645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libset645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsot645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libspa645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libstlport_gcc.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsvl645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libsvt645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libtk645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libtl645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libucbhelper2gcc3.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libutl645li.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libvos3gcc3.so /opt/OpenOffice.org/program/libxcr645li.so /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 /usr/X11R6/lib/libICE.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libSM.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXaw.so.7 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXmu.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXpm.so.4 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 Now do the same for Mozilla: for mozillaBinary in $( findBinaries /usr/local/mozilla1.7.5 ); do ldd "$mozillaBinary" done \ |lddCompact /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libdl.so.2 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 /lib/tls/libc.so.6 /lib/tls/libm.so.6 /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 So, there you have it. The list of shared object dependencies for Mozilla and for OpenOffice.org. You can concatenate and sort them (without the -u option) and find repeated lines to see what's shared between the two (sets of) applications. On my system, that leaves these: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libdl.so.2 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 /lib/tls/libc.so.6 /lib/tls/libm.so.6 /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 /opt/gnome/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 Ain't Unix Grand! Randall Schulz
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 12:51:
Today's a bit of a slow day, so I've done it all for you. See below.
Man, you *are* having a slow day. :) --Danny, who hasn't posted any >200 line messages in a while...
Danny, On Monday 24 January 2005 13:20, Danny Sauer wrote:
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2':
Today's a bit of a slow day, so I've done it all for you. See below.
Man, you *are* having a slow day. :)
Thanks for noticing! Hire me? But I sometimes view these things as if they were puzzles. You know, "How would you <fill in the blank>."
--Danny, who hasn't posted any >200 line messages in a while...
Note: These puzzles don't have an "in 50 words or less" clause. RRS
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 15:29:
Danny,
On Monday 24 January 2005 13:20, Danny Sauer wrote:
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2':
Today's a bit of a slow day, so I've done it all for you. See below.
Man, you *are* having a slow day. :)
Thanks for noticing! Hire me?
I just finished reviewing resumes (with a couple of collegues) for a web developer position - are you in central IL, and proficient with ecmaScript + Actionscript? Lemme know quickly - we're scheduling interviews right now. :)
But I sometimes view these things as if they were puzzles. You know, "How would you <fill in the blank>."
That's why I post - I'm mostly running distros other than SuSE now anyway... --Danny, who calls it "ecmaScript" in protest of the people who say "Java and related technologies, such as JavaScript"
Danny, On Monday 24 January 2005 14:12, Danny Sauer wrote:
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2':
...
Thanks for noticing! Hire me?
I just finished reviewing resumes (with a couple of collegues) for a web developer position - are you in central IL, and proficient with ecmaScript + Actionscript? Lemme know quickly - we're scheduling interviews right now. :)
I could handle the work, but I'm in California. And I'll only take on Web development work on a part-time, contract basis. Not as a full-time or permanent position.
...
--Danny, who calls it "ecmaScript" in protest of the people who say "Java and related technologies, such as JavaScript"
If you're bothered by inaccurate usage, how do you tolerate life among the computer-owning hoi polloi? RRS
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 16:16:
Danny,
On Monday 24 January 2005 14:12, Danny Sauer wrote:
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2':
...
Thanks for noticing! Hire me?
I just finished reviewing resumes (with a couple of collegues) for a web developer position - are you in central IL, and proficient with ecmaScript + Actionscript? Lemme know quickly - we're scheduling interviews right now. :)
I could handle the work, but I'm in California. And I'll only take on Web development work on a part-time, contract basis. Not as a full-time or permanent position.
You'd get bored with it anyway. Besides, CA's one heck of a commute from here.
--Danny, who calls it "ecmaScript" in protest of the people who say "Java and related technologies, such as JavaScript"
If you're bothered by inaccurate usage, how do you tolerate life among the computer-owning hoi polloi?
Well, I throw into the trash resumes which imply that Java and JavaScript are somehow related (aside from both being object-oriented, not compiled to machine-native code in most cases, and being poorly implemented by MS). That makes me feel good. The rest of the time, I bite my tongue. Generally, I've found that people who talk about computers like they're experts (but clearly aren't) won't understand when corrected anyway. I do a lot of tongue biting, though it helps that my wife's a bit of a geek herself... --Danny, whose chemistry geek wife is now working on a CS degree :)
Randall wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 16:36:
On Monday 24 January 2005 14:29, Danny Sauer wrote:
...
--Danny, whose chemistry geek wife is now working on a CS degree :)
Oooh! Computational chemistry! Very hip.
Actually, Chemistry was a free minor that essentially came with Clinical Lab Science (they're the people who let the Dr. know what diagnosis he should take credit for when he comes back into your waiting room with the "lab results"). I get the impression she's wanting to leave that behind, and just be computational. People don't generally know what "MT, ASCP" means after a name, though, so "Chemistry" is the easy answer. :) --Danny, who just needs to get her more interested in automotive bodywork now...
James wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Downgrading packages with Yast2' on Mon, Jan 24 at 15:38:
Danny Sauer wrote:
--Danny, who hasn't posted any >200 line messages in a while...
Thankfully! ;-)
Checking the archives, it looks like the longest message I've ever posted was 162 lines - including headers (I think - I just used mutt's pipe to command thing with wc -l). --Danny, who'll have to work on that... :)
Hylton, On Saturday 15 January 2005 07:07, Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:
...
I'm confused on my system when I get the 'Z' on a red item the caption says update.
Red items indicate a package installed on your system that whose version number indicates it is newer than the one offered by YOU. This happens to me, e.g., because I've applied (almost) all the supplementary updates for KDE made available by SuSE and installed via the YaST installer.
Hylton Conacher
Randall Schulz
participants (7)
-
Danny Sauer -
Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) -
James Knott -
Ken Schneider -
mikus＠bga.com -
Patrick Shanahan -
Randall R Schulz