Bristol Digest, Vol 584, Issue 7

Send Bristol mailing list submissions to
bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bristol
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bristol-request@mailman.lug.org.uk

You can reach the person managing the list at
bristol-owner@mailman.lug.org.uk

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Bristol digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: Which distro (Colin M. Strickland)
2. Re: Which distro (Ashley Pittman)
3. Re: Which distro (Neil Fraser)
4. Re: Which distro (Martin Habets)
5. Re: Which distro (Alex Butcher (LUG))
6. Re: Which distro (Richard Stearn)
7. Re: Which distro (D J Stewart)
8. Re: Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17 (Chris)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:56:00 +0000
From: "Colin M. Strickland" <cms@beatworm.co.uk>
To: "Bristol and Bath Linux User Group" <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <8A274EEA-35C7-4A29-A880-9AC3E3131BF0@beatworm.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

On 7 Jan 2015, at 16:51, Martin Moore wrote:

>> since they aren't using rpm at the moment they are doing version
>> control some other way.
>
>
>
>
>
> Erm no. </cough>
>
>
>
> I did say it was a mess ;)
>
>
>

That's probably meaningless admin work too. More efficient to just
include a timestamp in the source filenames.

--
Regards,
Colin M. Strickland, cms, 'that guy'.



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:13:48 +0000
From: Ashley Pittman <ashley@pittman.co.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Cc: Martin Moore <martinm@it-helps.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <7787D97D-F010-4A9A-A1DB-2D229C311868@pittman.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8


> On 7 Jan 2015, at 14:43, nick robinson <nick@njrobinson.net> wrote:
>
> It's basically red hat but just not with paid for support.

There?s nothing wrong with CentOS but you?d want to be using CentOS 7. If the number of servers you manage is small then consider RHEL itself as well, although this would cost money and it doesn?t sound like that kind of company.

> if you are not selling your inhouse s/w why package it? you're just add a layer of admin with no real benefit.

It appears relatively common for organisations who use interpreted software to use git, all the way through from development to deployment. This will work better if you?re using interprated languages obviously but it sounds like you?re working with PHP so it may be an option for you. There?s a great e-book called ?Jenkins the definitive guide? which contains a lot of good information, particularly the ?continuous delivery? chapter.

Ashley,


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:27:45 +0000
From: Neil Fraser <nfraser@nadtechnology.co.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID:
<CA+Pd-UmpA=OWfYp_dPLzk+RuyQdj3=a0eQXDQrWhM7bNxQ++jA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

It's a de-branded version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, so (mostly) well
respected.

HTH

Neil

On 7 January 2015 at 13:58, Martin Moore <martinm@it-helps.co.uk> wrote:

> I now have a new job, and have inherited a bit of a mess in many ways....
>
>
>
> Currently running on CentOS 5.2 and using apache2, php, mysql etc.
>
>
>
> So, where does Centos fit in the list of good distros, and if it?s not
> near the top, would I have any problems migrating to e.g. Debian (what I am
> used to).
>
>
>
> Also, none of our inhouse s/w is packaged ? can someone point me to a good
> online RPM package creation tutorial (unless I?m gonna move away from an
> RPM distro).
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Martin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bristol mailing list
> Bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bristol
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/private/bristol/attachments/20150107/beff163b/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:41:18 +0000
From: Martin Habets <errandir_news@mph.eclipse.co.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <20150107184118.GA5615@mph.eclipse.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 03:19:00PM +0000, Richard Stearn wrote:
> Martin Moore wrote:
> >Currently running on CentOS 5.2 and using apache2, php, mysql etc.
>
> Repackaged RedHat, stick with it.
>
> >Also, none of our inhouse s/w is packaged - can someone point me to a good
> >online RPM package creation tutorial (unless I'm gonna move away from an RPM
> >distro).
>
> Packaging inhouse software, good move. Good RPM tutorial, none known here.

Take your pick from here:
http://rpm5.org/docs.php

Martin



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:19:14 +0000
From: "Alex Butcher (LUG)" <lug@assursys.co.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>,
Richard Stearn <richard@rns-stearn.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <BB63B1BD-5D7C-427B-AE37-8F01293FAA74@assursys.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8



On 7 January 2015 15:24:58 GMT+00:00, Richard Stearn <richard@rns-stearn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>nick robinson wrote:
>> It's basically red hat but just not with paid for support.
>> if you are not selling your inhouse s/w why package it? you're just
>add a
>> layer of admin with no real benefit.
>
>Configuration control, traceability. Yes, a little extra work, pays
>dividends
>when things go pear shaped.
>
>Source code control gives traceabilty of what went into a package, the
>package
>gives traceability of where and when it was in use.

What Richard said. I've even been packaging stuff for my home machines since I realised this back around '98.

Re tutorials, only (old) books; "Maximum RPM" and "Red Hat RPM Guide". Combine those with current Fedora best practice docs and you should be pretty OK.

--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:55:32 +0000
From: Richard Stearn <richard@rns-stearn.demon.co.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <54AD9D44.8090200@rns-stearn.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Martin Moore wrote:
> OK, sounds decent enough! I guess I?m used to packages ? is a
> tar the simple alternative?

If what you are installing in one unique directory, possibly.

If you installing to system directories then no.

The issue is not so much installing but removing stuff. A packaging
system (even one as simple as the Slackware one) keeps track of what
was installed where and allows you to remove it in a simple way.
It also allows for install/uninstall scripts to be run at appropriate
points in the process.

--
Regards
Richard




------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 00:08:52 +0000 (GMT)
From: D J Stewart <bblug@iridium.org.uk>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1501072344480.19147@carbon>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

On Wed, 7 Jan 2015, nick robinson wrote:

> having worked with martin on previous projects where the custom deb
> packing was a complete ball ache i am more than happy to say copying
> some small internal development sources from one machine to another can
> be a hell of a lot more efficient than maintaining packaged files.

Then your experience is different to mine. I've worked with Martin and
his habit of packaging everything properly made life much easier than it
would otherwise have been.

By way of example, he had some servers using template toolkit and relying
on Apache::Template. A recentish (2009 or so) change to TT2 broke A::T.
It was a simple enough thing to fix[0]. Because it was packaged by Martin
and added to his local APT repository, upgrading all affected servers
happened automatically on "apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade".
Because it was packaged, any new servers needing Apache::Template
automatically got the right thing. At no point was there the tedious
administrative overhead of having to remember that Apache::Template is a
special case and needs to be installed using "svn co ... && perl
Makefile.PL && make && make test && make install"

Packaging allows for you to continue using the standard system tools in
order to manage all of the software on your system. It allows you do do
simple integrity checks to detect accidental corruption (eg, debsums), it
allows you to make sure that the absence of the package you are about to
uninstall won't break some other package you will still be using on your
system. Packaging helps you to maintain the integrity and consistency of
the software on your system and will save you from yourself. It is WELL
worth the small amount of overhead.

[0] I sent a diff to the person who appears to maintain Apache::Template
for Apache2 but so far the version he distributes seems to be unfixed,
so I guess very few people use that module.

--
Dave Stewart



------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 08:44:12 +0000
From: Chris <cshorler@googlemail.com>
To: Nigel Gunton <nigel.gunton@uwe.ac.uk>, Bristol and Bath Linux User
Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17
Message-ID: <1B8F75A5-1526-4B52-AB4A-D96FB5C59C5B@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 7 January 2015 15:19:30 GMT+00:00, nigel.gunton@uwe.ac.uk wrote:
>On Wed, 7 Jan 2015, Andrew McLean wrote:
>
>> Thanks to Shane and Nick r for replying to this.
>>
>> 'gv --help' doesn't say anything useful.
>> There's no difference in behaviour with '-orientation=...' and
>> '--orientation=...'.
>> gv simply ignores the options. Same applies to the '--scale' option.
>
>gv --orientation=seascape -scale=0.25 level_crossing_asm.eps
>
>works fine for me with -- or -
>
>bash$ gv --version
>gv 3.7.4
>
>bash$ gs --version
>9.15

Does gs read the file or throw errors?

Can you upload and link a failing PostScript?

If you're doing this every time maybe a prologue is a good idea (there should be a suitable example in the ghostscript package)

Chris






------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Bristol mailing list
Bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bristol

End of Bristol Digest, Vol 584, Issue 7
***************************************