FC6 Yum Repositories

[cgrant]

Which repos/sources.list should I use in Yum for FC6. The install howtos all refer to FC5 at the moment.

Many thanks
Colin

[DaveRun]

According to this (http://fedoranews.org/cms/node/1720) Linva is ready for FC6. Probably if you check the web pages for the particular repository you'll find out if they are up for FC6.

[leigh123@linux]

livna FC6 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/ leigh

[KStorm]

livna FC6 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/ leighI'm a complete nooooB when it comes to yum, so how should I install this repo? Thanks.

[nick.stumpos]

on my install the livna repos were already there just edit the file in /etc/yum.repos/livna ec..
so that enabled =1

[leigh123@linux]

just click this link and install http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/x86_64/livna-release-6-1.noarch.rpm

[KStorm]

just click this link and install http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/x86_64/livna-release-6-1.noarch.rpm
Thank you. Is there a list of other third-party repos that will work for FC6?

[Firewing1]

Freshrpms
Livna
Core, Extras, Updates, etc
Firewing1

[bvs33]

How would one go about ienabling the freshrpms repo?

[3006828]

asking a dumb question.. why do the repos need to actually change from each new distro to the next?

why cant the packages be "distro ammune" if you like?

[ajamison]

asking a dumb question.. why do the repos need to actually change from each new distro to the next?

why cant the packages be "distro ammune" if you like?
I was wondering the same thing

[iamroot]

Be careful not to mix repos. If you want to use Livna, stick to Livna/Extras. If you want to use Freshrpms, then go with Freshrpms/Dries and the rest. Don't mix the two sets. They have conflicting packages.

[ajamison]

Another stupid repo question what is the difference between Livina and FreshRPMS

[GreyWizzard]

asking a dumb question.. why do the repos need to actually change from each new distro to the next?

why cant the packages be "distro ammune" if you like?
I'm no expert by any means, but the way I understand it is that each release is a bit different. Some of the things that make it "newer and better" mean that what worked for the last release will not work with the current. I think that it is usually called "progress".

Of course, if you look at the packages that are on your system you will find several that have a "noarch" extension to them. Those actually are, as you put it, "distro ammune". They would be the same from FC5 to FC6 to FC4.

Another stupid repo question what is the difference between Livina and FreshRPMS
I think I might be able to shed some light on this one since I asked the same question once on the actual Livna site (bad idea, by the way. I would NEVER suggest it).

The main difference is the way they do things. They both seem to have the same concept, but use a very different approach. What you basically end up with is a Cherry Tomato on one side and a Beefsteak Tomato on the other. Both are tomatoes, but not exactly the same.

Unfortunately, unlike tomatoes, the two do NOT mix when it comes to Fedora. If you start with one variety, you need to stick with it. Trust me (and the others) on this one. I have personally roached a perfectly good install just because I wanted to get creative with the Repos.

[ajamison]

thanks that information helps alot

[cgrant]

Is there any advantage in going one way or the other (Freshrpms or Livna)? It seems that it just might be personal choice but one set might have a slant that the other does not.

Thanks
Colin

[GreyWizzard]

just click this link and install http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/6/x86_64/livna-release-6-1.noarch.rpm
BTW,

Just thought I would throw out a note about the above link for those who had not noticed it on their own yet.

That link is wonderful if you are using the 64bit Fedora Core 6. If not, then you should really try this Livna Repo Installer (http://rpm.livna.org/livna-release-6.rpm)

It did the trick for my i386 load on the laptop.

I do want to send out a special thanks to Leigh, though. My desktop will eventually be a 64bit system and it is nice to know that I don't have to go search for the correct loader when that happens. :)

[cgrant]

Not all software comes in 64 bit but you can install 32 bit apps on 64 bit Fedora - that is how I understand it anyway. What I don't know is are the 32 bit apps available in then 64 bit repositories or is there a need to set the 32 bit repos up as well?
Many thanks
Colin

[GreyWizzard]

Not all software comes in 64 bit but you can install 32 bit apps on 64 bit Fedora - that is how I understand it anyway. What I don't know is are the 32 bit apps available in then 64 bit repositories or is there a need to set the 32 bit repos up as well?
Many thanks
Colin
My experience with the two 64bit boxes at home have been both enlightening and confusing on that front.

I know that I get both 64 and 32 bit updates from the 64bit repositories. I didn't have to do a thing different to make that happen, it just did.

I do remember reading, however, that if you wanted to do, for example, a 32bit firefox install you should have a 32bit repository configured. A simple "yum install firefox" from the 64bit environment would always give you the 64 bit version.

The best rule of thumb is always to go with the repository that is specific to your system. If you do not have a 64 bit system, do not count on the 64bit repository for your updates/installs.

[cgrant]

Excellent, thanks :)

I'll stick with the 64 bit repos unless the app is not in them.

Colin

[3006828]

I'm no expert by any means, but the way I understand it is that each release is a bit different. Some of the things that make it "newer and better" mean that what worked for the last release will not work with the current. I think that it is usually called "progress".

progress, dam you dont say :P

Of course, if you look at the packages that are on your system you will find several that have a "noarch" extension to them. Those actually are, as you put it, "distro ammune". They would be the same from FC5 to FC6 to FC4.

Hence my confussion, arnt .fc4 .fc5 .fc6 packaged programs somewhat redundant if all can use the .noarch?? Why bother with compiling them distro specific at all?

[Firewing1]

No, a .noarch.fc4 is different from a .noarch.fc5
Firewing1

[bigfootnmd]

OK this is what I get when I run YUM from the command line as root in FC6

http://crash.fce.vutbr.cz/crash-hat/6/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] HTTP Error 404: Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 02:41:08 GMT
Server: Apache/2.0.54 (Fedora)
Content-Length: 313
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

Trying other mirror.
Error: Cannot open/read repomd.xml file for repository: crash-hat

Any help will be appreciated.

[GreyWizzard]

No, a .noarch.fc4 is different from a .noarch.fc5
Firewing1
I think I may have bumbled that one, Firewing1.

Going back over my own post, I may have represented that one incorrectly.

The 'noarch' is actually going to be more specific to the i386 vs x86_64 (32bit vs 64bit). All things that are version-specific will still be required for the "progress" of new code.

Is there any advantage in going one way or the other (Freshrpms or Livna)? It seems that it just might be personal choice but one set might have a slant that the other does not.

Thanks
Colin

Didn't mean to let this one slide.

Once again, just my opinion and experience, but I have found things on the Livna site that are not available on the FreshRPMs site.

In particular, I find all the ATI Video modules in RPM format there, I find many of the 'nonfree' packages (including things such as MP3 plugins for many of the multimedia packages), NVIDIA kernel modules, etc.

Asking someone for the 'best' repository and their reason why is almost like asking people about the best religion and why. It all comes down to a personal preference.

What works well for me may not be what you choose and I both respect and expect that. It is all up to the individual user and their personal needs and preferences.