PDA

View Full Version : MythTV on F8 without ATrpms?



LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 11:44 AM
Anyone know of a way to easily get MythTV up and running on F8, without using ATrpms packages? I use Livna as my source for non GPL'd goodies, and ATrpms wants to trash my setup in order to install MythTV; not to mention, I don't like repos that overwrite core files with their own versions, messy, messy.

drunkahol
21st April 2008, 12:47 PM
When you implement the ATrpms repo, just edit the repo file and put enabled=0 instead of enabled=1.

Then whenever you do yum updates, you will only be using ATrpms if you add --enablerepo=atrpms to the command line.

Do this to install mythtv, then check for *myth* updates with ATrpms enabled every now and again.

Works for me - and I DID get the same trashed systems in the early days due to the nature of ATrpms. It's not a fault of ATrpms, however, it's designed that way. Kind of like a different distro to Fedora, but using Fedora as it's initial starting point.

As for getting mythtv from other repos, I'd be interested. Haven't seen it anywhere to date however.

Cheers

Duncan

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 01:49 PM
Problem is that in order for yum to install MythTV from ATrpms, it must install the dependencies from the ATrpms repo. This requires manually removing previously installed Livna versions of such packages as faad2, mjpegtools, etc. and disabling Livna's repo during MythTV install, as Livna's versions of said packages is more current, and would therefore be given priority over ATrpms packages during install, this of course causes a world of problems. Once this is done, half the multimedia functionality is left broken because of incompatibilities induced by the mixture of Livna and ATrpms packages. As you can see, I have tried this and the mixture causes a real conundrum.

I assume I will have to grab a tarball and just build a copy myself.

drunkahol
21st April 2008, 02:45 PM
True - Livna needs disabling during the MythTV install. But the only point of contention for me was faad2, so I uninstalled the Livna version and installed the ATrpms version.

Now I have to --exclude=faad2 every time I use yum, but I figured that was a small price to pay.

Cheers

Duncan

leigh123linux
21st April 2008, 02:50 PM
True - Livna needs disabling during the MythTV install. But the only point of contention for me was faad2, so I uninstalled the Livna version and installed the ATrpms version.

Now I have to --exclude=faad2 every time I use yum, but I figured that was a small price to pay.

Cheers

Duncan


Add this to the /etc/yum.repos.d/livna.repo




exclude=faad2


i.e



[livna]
name=Livna for Fedora Core $releasever - $basearch - Base
baseurl=
http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
http://livna.cat.pdx.edu/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
http://wftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/livna/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/rpm.livna.org/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
http://mirror.atrpms.net/livna/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
ftp://mirrors.tummy.com/pub/rpm.livna.org/fedora/$releasever/$basearch/
failovermethod=priority
#mirrorlist=http://rpm.livna.org/mirrorlist-7
exclude=faad2
enabled=1
gpgcheck=1
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-livna


It will exclude faad2 from livna

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 03:12 PM
Already tried that, but ATrpms faad2 is the main problem, if I attempt to use ATrpms faad2, I lose ablilty to play avis, mpgs, etc. Totem-Xine dosen't work with the ATrpms faad2. Seems like I'd have to go back and whack all the Livna MM stuff to get MythTV to work.

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 03:18 PM
BTW: I don't see libfaad listed as a dependency of totem-xine, so it must be a dependency of a required package, because it certainly breaks multimedia when I try ATrpms faad2

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 03:22 PM
Found it, it's breaking Livna's ffmpeg-libs

leigh123linux
21st April 2008, 03:31 PM
Found it, it's breaking Livna's ffmpeg-libs



Why don't you rebuild the srpm and use livna deps for the build !!




su
yum install rpmdevtools


as non-root ( you will need to install all the required devels from livna only )


rpmdev-setuptree
wget http://dl.atrpms.net/all/mythtv-0.21-185.src.rpm
rpmbuild --rebuild mythtv-0.21-185.src.rpm

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 06:48 PM
I took a look at the srpm a couple of days ago, but to date, I haven't fooled with it.

LinuxTom
21st April 2008, 06:58 PM
Well, here we go again! The build fails, he's using non-standard rpm macros. I'll try and find a way around the madness.

leigh123linux
21st April 2008, 07:27 PM
Well, here we go again! The build fails, he's using non-standard rpm macros. I'll try and find a way around the madness.



Try installing the atrpms-rpm-config ;)


http://dl.atrpms.net/all/atrpms-rpm-config-177-1.noarch.rpm

sej7278
21st April 2008, 10:05 PM
the atrpms srpm really needs to be converted to work as a standard rpm that can pull in livna deps, that would be a good piece of work.

either that or build a srpm/specfile from scratch that can be applied to the latest mythtv sources using the livna deps.

big bit of work either of those. i think a replacement for mythv would effectively kill off atrpms - why else would you use it (maybe the legacy firewire stuff).

leigh123linux
21st April 2008, 11:57 PM
the atrpms srpm really needs to be converted to work as a standard rpm that can pull in livna deps, that would be a good piece of work.

either that or build a srpm/specfile from scratch that can be applied to the latest mythtv sources using the livna deps.

big bit of work either of those. i think a replacement for mythv would effectively kill off atrpms - why else would you use it (maybe the legacy firewire stuff).

If someone donated the repo space + bandwidth I could easily convert mythtv to livna deps !! ;)

LinuxTom
22nd April 2008, 01:35 AM
After 6 hours of work and modifying over 50 ATrpms source packages, I have a functional MythTV setup, built to use good old Livna packages.

I'm gonna have to test it all out tomorrow, but looks like it's a total go; probably need to tidy up the spec files a bit though.

leigh123linux
22nd April 2008, 10:24 AM
After 6 hours of work and modifying over 50 ATrpms source packages, I have a functional MythTV setup, built to use good old Livna packages.

I'm gonna have to test it all out tomorrow, but looks like it's a total go; probably need to tidy up the spec files a bit though.


Did the atrpms macros in post # 12 help ?

LinuxTom
22nd April 2008, 01:21 PM
I had to use the macros, I had already found out about them at the AT devel site, shortly before your post, but thanks none the less.

The only problem I am seeing here is the conflict between ATrpms PIL and the base python-imaging package, I had to --nodeps to install without PIL, and looking at the spec and contents of PIL there are omissions and additions over the Fedora python imaging package. I have yet to sort this out.

BTW: You have any idea as to the actual function of the package atrpms? It is required for most AT packages, and specifically provides atrpms-perl-module-helper, but I haven't had time to figure out just what it's doing. It seems to be pulling in other repositories or something to that effect.

Also, to get the whole shebang running, I had to set up some udev local rules to allow access to the /dev/video? devices; suppose I'll need to build a package to set that up as well, otherwise I can't get ivtv working. Strange though, because it looks like when the module loads, the dev nodes are being created with extended access right that should grant access.

I'm also going to have to look into a couple of packages that I could find no srpms for on ATrpms, I don't want to have to pull in anything from that repo. Guess if I get it straightened out and can find some hosting space, I'll post the repo, and save others some grief.

leigh123linux
22nd April 2008, 01:45 PM
I had to use the macros, I had already found out about them at the AT devel site, shortly before your post, but thanks none the less.

The only problem I am seeing here is the conflict between ATrpms PIL and the base python-imaging package, I had to --nodeps to install without PIL, and looking at the spec and contents of PIL there are omissions and additions over the Fedora python imaging package. I have yet to sort this out.

BTW: You have any idea as to the actual function of the package atrpms? It is required for most AT packages, and specifically provides atrpms-perl-module-helper, but I haven't had time to figure out just what it's doing. It seems to be pulling in other repositories or something to that effect.

Also, to get the whole shebang running, I had to set up some udev local rules to allow access to the /dev/video? devices; suppose I'll need to build a package to set that up as well, otherwise I can't get ivtv working. Strange though, because it looks like when the module loads, the dev nodes are being created with extended access right that should grant access.

I'm also going to have to look into a couple of packages that I could find no srpms for on ATrpms, I don't want to have to pull in anything from that repo. Guess if I get it straightened out and can find some hosting space, I'll post the repo, and save others some grief.


I have cut the atrpms package down to the bare essentials , it's just a helper script for the atrpms perl packages .



eval `perl -V:installsitearch`
eval `perl -V:installsitelib`
eval `perl -V:installvendorarch`
eval `perl -V:installvendorlib`

PERL5LIB=${installsitearch}:${installsitelib}:${in stallvendorarch}:${installvendorlib}
export PERL5LIB

unset installsitearch installsitelib installvendorarch installvendorlib

See attachment



The only problem I am seeing here is the conflict between ATrpms PIL and the base python-imaging package, I had to --nodeps to install without PIL, and looking at the spec and contents of PIL there are omissions and additions over the Fedora python imaging package. I have yet to sort this out.


You could add a conflicts line to the PIL srpm



Conflicts: python-imaging

LinuxTom
22nd April 2008, 03:39 PM
I'll try the conflicts line, but I'm not sure whether using python-imaging will work as there are some unresolved differences as of yet.

And I am having problems with perl-HTTP-Cache-Transparent and libXvMCW-devel. Due to hoards of dependencies, I can't get them to build locally.

Otherwise my local repo is working well.

leigh123linux
22nd April 2008, 05:15 PM
I'll try the conflicts line, but I'm not sure whether using python-imaging will work as there are some unresolved differences as of yet.

And I am having problems with perl-HTTP-Cache-Transparent and libXvMCW-devel. Due to hoards of dependencies, I can't get them to build locally.

Otherwise my local repo is working well.



I'll try the conflicts line, but I'm not sure whether using python-imaging will work as there are some unresolved differences as of yet.


Swap PIL for python-imaging in the mythtv spec as python-imaging should work !



And I am having problems with perl-HTTP-Cache-Transparent and libXvMCW-devel. Due to hoards of dependencies, I can't get them to build locally.

Are these packages a issue ? ( just use perl-HTTP-Cache-Transparent and libXvMCW-devel from the atrpms repo for your own repo !)

tsorvoja
22nd April 2008, 05:41 PM
Try kwizart repo (http://kwizart.free.fr/fedora/kwizart-release-8.noarch.rpm). That should be also livna compatible so you don't have to tweak that much with repo conflicts. They also have other goodies like cinelerra.

LinuxTom
22nd April 2008, 11:38 PM
I tried swapping python-imaging for PIL in mythtv.spec, the only reference to PIL was in the sub-package dependencies for mytharchive. The build went fine, and rpm -qp --requires showed the dependency for python-imaging, but yum stills shows PIL as a dependency to mytharchive. Tried a yum clean all, new metadata changed nothing. Not sure what is being referenced in there, I saw no files listed anywhere, that could be provided by the PIL package.

Kind of frustrating, I can rpm -ihv --nodeps and it all works with python-imaging, but I don't like broken packages, unsatisfied dependencies, lying around. Plus I want my repo to work. LOL

I may tinker with the PIL package, and see how much difference there is between the two, and just make a PIL containing whatever ATrpms added, then add both dependencies to the spec.

As for the other two packages, that's what I am doing. The really don't have to be rebuild, but If I could get an srpm, I'd add a custom vendor_id tag, always do, for my own sanity.


And tsorvoja, where did you find this repo, I have never seen any reference to it before.

LinuxTom
23rd April 2008, 12:46 AM
Well, duh!!!

I figured out the PIL issue, if I change the reference in mythtv.spec from PIL to python-imaging, it actuall does just that.

I assume the way that rpm is resolving dependencies it simply sees python imaging, which is correct. Yum, on the other hand, seems to dig deeper, it was seeing python-imaging, then resolving to PIL.

I had forgotten and left the PIL rpm in the repo, and the PIL spec contains the reference.


# Compatibility hooks
Provides: python-imaging = %{evr}
Obsoletes: python-imaging < %{evr}

So yum believed I wanted to pull in PIL. Once I removed the PIL package and rebuilt the repo data, MythTV installed without a hitch.

It seems as though everything is still working, but I still want to investigate just what the differences between the two packages are, as I know ATrpms has ommited all the *.pyo files, and added 6 scripts, over the fedora package.

LinuxTom
23rd April 2008, 12:47 AM
Thanks for all the suggestions!

stevea
23rd April 2008, 01:30 AM
Nothing stupid about it Tom. It's complicated and easy to trip over the obvious.
If you have time to post a concise & detailed description I'm sure it would
help many.

Congrat's and ... tell us more.

LinuxTom
23rd April 2008, 01:33 PM
I'll try and work up an explanation of what I had to do to get it working once I verify that everything works properly. I really didn't have to do that much, besides the challenge of figuring out what I had to change around. I've been using Linux/Unix for years, but only mess with rpm building when the software I want is not available in the form in which I want it, so it takes a bit of head scratching to get it right. Not to mention, I suspect that Axel at ATrpms is a perl wizard or something, it looks like most of the changes to ATrpms stuff is perl related, and I haven't written a perl script since '97.

tsorvoja
23rd April 2008, 03:10 PM
Tom: I just happened to google it (http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=177005) when looking for livna compatible cinelerra packages. :) Installed cinelerra and MythTV and those seem to work (MythTV not configured properly yet, but it's running). Everything installedwithout hitches.

LinuxTom
26th April 2008, 08:49 PM
Just for the record, although with some trial and error, I managed to port the ATrpms MythTV packages over to work with Livna packages. I now find it somewhat silly to fool with the build dependencies and such required to get it working, when the MythTV packages that tsorvoja referenced, work just fine, and require no knowledge of package building. Therefore, I am not posting any instructions as to how I did this, and suggest that people simply use the kwizart repo that tsorvoja mentioned, which appears to be connected to the RPMfusion construct. I assume that if all goes well with the RPMfusion project, that we will have simple access to MythTV in the near future.

Flyboy917
27th April 2008, 02:26 PM
Ever tried Mythdora? Its a darn good Mythtv OS. Currently is based Fedora core 5 or 6 but a new version, based on Fedora 8 is coming out any day now. Zero hassles, works out of the box.
:)

Flyboy917
28th April 2008, 04:28 AM
Mythdora5 is out
http://dl.atrpms.net/mythdora/5.0/i386/iso/MythDora-5.0-i386-DVD.iso

jdeslip
24th September 2008, 10:26 PM
kwizarts repo seems to not exist any more (probably because he is putting his packages in rpmfusion) - is there another place to get the rpms before rpmfusion goes live?