Bristol Digest, Vol 584, Issue 8

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 (Amias Channer)
2. Re: Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17 (Andrew McLean)
3. Re: Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17 (Shane McEwan)


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

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 12:03:23 +0000
From: Amias Channer <me@amias.net>
To: Bristol and Bath Linux User Group <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Which distro
Message-ID:
<CAMgU7XUr3K6cS=YyESh0A12nmdNnB-DFOjQAhgqU5Z46et_wQA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hello Martin,

I definitely agree with the sentiment that packaging is important , if you
don't do it you end up doing work that prevents you doing it in future and
so will everyone else and then bad things happen.

Package it and test it because that is the right way to do it.

RPM is stable and works , i think you will probably want to find a tutorial
for creating RPMs that focuses on the type of packages you want to make
e.g. applications need a different approach from services and everything
has different requirements for how updates work in relation to
configuration files.

Another option to consider is docker which allows you to create something
between a chroot and virtual machine , it has the advantage of being cross
platform so you should then be reasonably distro agnostic. It only works
properly on 64bit machines for me but that might be an ubuntu/debian thing.

Cheers
Amias

On 8 January 2015 at 00:08, D J Stewart <bblug@iridium.org.uk> wrote:

> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150108/7a4ed7f0/attachment-0001.html>

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

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 12:33:40 +0000
From: Andrew McLean <am57762@gmail.com>
To: LUG <bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [bristol] Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17
Message-ID: <54AE7924.5010205@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Solved. I had created a script to run 'gs', and named it 'gv' by
mistake, so lost
the ability to run real 'gv'....
Thanks for the help...
Andrew (embarrassed...)




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

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:29:18 +0000
From: Shane McEwan <shane@mcewan.id.au>
To: bristol@mailman.lug.org.uk
Subject: Re: [bristol] Problems viewing Postscript files in Mint 17
Message-ID: <54AE943E.5070705@mcewan.id.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

On 08/01/15 12:33, Andrew McLean wrote:
> Solved. I had created a script to run 'gs', and named it 'gv' by
> mistake, so lost
> the ability to run real 'gv'....

Hehe. 'which' is your friend!

Shane.



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

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

End of Bristol Digest, Vol 584, Issue 8
***************************************