| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Comments:
<0> it's saying, "Determining IP information for eth0... failed; no link present. Check cable?" (I have 2 net cards in the Linux computer)
<0> I tried it with eth1 and it worked
<1> rudyV: then maybe you want eth1? =]
<2> What is the difference between a source package and a binary package for a particular distro?
<1> rudyV: there you go. you can check your ip with "/sbin/ifconfig eth1"
<3> Source code is compiled, which producs binaries.
<0> I'm up!
<3> "Machine language" -> Binary.
<4> MaestroTech: a source package is not compiled in to a working program/library
<0> PuTTY just asked me if I wanted to add my server's SSH key to its cache
<0> And I'm In!
<4> rudyV: if you want to connect, the answer is probably yes
<0> I'm connected :)
<2> AntonTakk: Okay, here is a better question. What is the difference between a source package for a particular distro and a source package that is platform-independent.
<0> [root@localhost ~]#
<4> MaestroTech: well, a distro and a platform are completely different things
<2> AntonTakk: oh boy.
<2> oh i see
<4> Distro = Fedora, Red Hat, CentOS, etc
<2> platform = win,linux,mac..etc.
<2> got it, thanks.
<3> Platform can mean any one of the subject at hand.
<5> im on windows,fc4,centos
<5> :)
<4> Platform = x86/32, x86/64, SPARC32, Sparc64
<6> even architecture
<3> An architecture platromf is x86, x86_64, PPC, MIPS, Amiga SPARC(RISC).
<4> well, true
<2> AutOPSY: I'm just confused between what the difference is between an .RPM and a Source .RPM
<3> PPC is RISC CPU family also.
<1> MaestroTech: the platform independent packages tend to be things written in crossplatform scripts like python or perl
<4> MaestroTech: rpm = ready to be used
<4> src.rpm = you have to compile it
<2> can you patch a src.rpm ?
<3> AntonTakk, be at least somewhat politically correct.
<3> AntonTakk, a source RPM is a RPM with source..
<4> AutOPSY: scuse me?
<3> "ready to be used" He asked what it was not if it was ready to be used.
<4> AutOPSY: i'm not sure how much clearer i can be on the subject, he has already been told several different ways
<3> MaestroTech, src.rpms contain patch files, rpmbuild patches source archives on the fly. (During building of a binary packaged RPM)
<0> I like SSH :)
<2> rudyV: what did you say? i'm sorry, you are encrypted. jk
<3> AntonTakk, what is the difference between an apple and an orange?
<4> AutOPSY: I eat oranges
<6> oranges don't run OSX
<3> AntonTakk, that tells me nothing about what they are though.
<0> MaestroTech: If cryptography is outlawed, then only outlaws will have cryptography.
<3> AntonTakk, you are ***uming I even know what fruit(an RPM) is.
<4> AutOPSY: no, generally I ***ume the person doesn't know wth they are talking about, and so try to represent it in the most general way possible
<3> AntonTakk, that is how slang was born.
<4> and?
<3> AntonTakk, anyhow.. S in SRPM means source. And RPM is a package for Redhat/Fedora Core systems precompiled and packaged right?
<4> right
<7> you cuzzz.. you better put down that RPM before I ice your arse
<7> s/you/yo
<3> AntonTakk, aren't SRPMS and RPMS.. both "ready to be used"?
<3> AntonTakk, maybe I've misinterpreted your explanation.
<4> AutOPSY: not to a newb/beginner
<3> AntonTakk, exactly. Well, since you are newb/beginner.. RPMS and SRPMS are both "ready to be used".
<4> MaestroTech: does me telling you that an SRPM contains source code mean you know what to do with said SRPM?
<8> check?
<3> PsychoDad, we actually don't charge here in #Fedora.. ;p
<8> checkmate :)
<3> The bill is on the house.
<2> so, SRPM are the same as RPMS with the Source added to it?
<8> AutOPSY: that's why i like linux :)
<4> MaestroTech: no
<0> It's a labor of love ;)
<8> hehe....
<8> round 2 ... *ding*
<9> how can i read from an NTFS drive?
<8> HaXtut[KB]: by reading the faq :)
<7> you need kernel modules
<2> so, SRPM are the same as RPMS with the Source Code included?
<7> MaestroTech, no
<7> MaestroTech, srpms make rpms
<4> MaestroTech: a SRPM *ONLY* contains the source code required to build the "regular" RPM
<2> OH!!
<2> why would anyone want the SRPM?
<4> MaestroTech: because we are strance, perverted little people
<3> MaestroTech, binaries don't grow on trees.
<4> strange*
<1> MaestroTech: so we can hack them if we want to and make our own rpms
<4> MaestroTech: basically so that they can customize/compile it to match their needs
<2> egoot: ..... for your own perverted uses?
<2> understood.
<1> MaestroTech: It's about being open. In fact for a lot of the software in fedora they are *required* by the licence to send the source along too
<2> thank god i asked.
<2> i didn't realize that RPM required a process.
<1> MaestroTech: don't judge me and my dirty inclinations :-P
<4> egoot: not send it along, but at least make it available
<2> ...to create them.
<2> a process that involved source to rpm
<4> MaestroTech: you ***umed there were summoned from the firey pits of hades, or something?
<1> AntonTakk: oh, right.
<2> weird. i thought binary packages were just compressed tar files
<8> no, we don't by them from microsoft
<4> ......
<4> MaestroTech: Linux doesn't live in the stone age like BSD does :)
<2> hmm
<3> MaestroTech, not exactly. Maybe for Debian or Slackware, or some other off the way distribution.. RPMs are a cpio archive with a binary header, as best as I know it.
<2> doesn't slackware use .tgz files?
<4> yes, slack uses tgz files
<5> yeah
<3> The header is the information used by Redhat's rpm utility.
<2> Debian and Ubuntu uses .deb
<2> and the aptitude utility (apt-get)
<5> Bsd uses source
<5> :)
<2> phoul: foul!
<5> ?
<4> MaestroTech: just a re-named tarball with a few special files (iirc)
<2> AntonTakk: hehe.
<0> What else is out there besides the Fedora FAQ for me to read?
<2> okay, before i head to bed....
<5> fedoraforum.org
<8> i would not say bsd lives in the stone ages ... mac os x looks quite adult
<2> I love you guys.
<4> rudyV: man pages!
<2> nice bunch of support dudes i have come across.
<2> first time i felt defended as a newb.
<1> MaestroTech: debian and ubuntu also have source debs that have everything to make the binary debs. just like srpms
<3> PsychoDad, MacOSX isn't exactly BSD.
<5> Its not BSD is it?
<2> sdebs ?
<5> Its Unix but not bsd
<8> AutOPSY: not exactly, but it's based on it .. as far as i know
<4> MacOSX would be a cave man who has been bathed, shaved, and put in an expensive suit
<2> you guys don't make me feel stupid.
<2> and i thank you very much for that.
<5> :) yeah yall are nice people
<5> :) im still somewhat of a newd to fc4 but not to linux <3
<4> OMG
<2> goodnight my friends.
<4> he's NEWD!
<5> Unk
<4> ;)
<2> :-O
<5> Damn spelling strikes again
<4> hehe
<2> da da da
<1> this is definitely one of the friendlier distro channels. I don't know how you guys maintain this atmosphere
<5> We drink
<5> ><
<2> lol
<4> phoul: you should have seen my spelling after configuring bind :)
<2> >.>
<0> bind?
Return to
#fedora
or
Go to some related
logs:
disable-pcmcia debian
fc5 unload soundcard module
installation poppler fails emerge
#ldap
bc43xx firmware
setting up a ssh tunnel with slackware
#linux
#kde
Ubuntu with Juno
freeradius mysql ERROR 1064 (42000)
|
|