On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Zoran Ovcin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On 05/16/2011 06:22 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> >> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Zoran Ovcin<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/15/2011 04:58 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Zoran Ovcin<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It worked out. >>>>> >>>>> Now I am on Scientific linux, yum update passed ok. >>>> >>>> Great. What does "yum list extras" say? And did you re-install all >>>> your packages, so you're not in license violation with Red Hat ? >>>> >>> For now, since I hadn't updated RHEL6, only packages that are newer in >>> SL6 >>> than matching packages in RHEL6 are updated. But, yum update works. >>> >>> What is with extras packages? Are they within SL6? Can they be updated >>> also? >>> >>> Zoran >> >> That command shows RPM's that are not part of your currently enabled >> repositories. It's very handy, when switching repositories, to >> identify ones that you don't want sticking around. In this case, it >> would help reveal packages from RHEL or CentOS or whatever you >> switched *from* that had different versions and might cause depencency >> conflicts. > > Here is the output: > # yum list extras > Loaded plugins: aliases, changelog, downloadonly, fastestmirror, presto, > protect-packages, refresh-packagekit, > : rhnplugin, security, tmprepo, verify, versionlock > This system is not registered with RHN. > RHN support will be disabled. > Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile > * epel: mirror01.th.ifl.net > * epel-testing: mirror01.th.ifl.net > * sl: ftp.scientificlinux.org > * sl-security: ftp.scientificlinux.org > * sl6x: ftp.scientificlinux.org > * sl6x-security: ftp.scientificlinux.org > Extra Packages > Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-Release_Notes-6-en-US.noarch > 1-21.el6 > @anaconda-RedHatEnterpriseLinux-201009221801.x86_64 > acroread.i686 9.4.0-1.el6 > @SupplementInstallMedia/6Workstation > flash-plugin.x86_64 10.3.162.29-0.1.el6.rf > @rpmforge/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun-demo.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-demo-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun-devel.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-devel-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun-jdbc.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-jdbc-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun-plugin.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-plugin-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > java-1.6.0-sun-src.x86_64 1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6 > @/java-1.6.0-sun-src-1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > kmod-kspiceusb-rhel60.x86_64 4.9-14.el6 > @SupplementInstallMedia/6Workstation > libavcore0.x86_64 0.6.1-38.1_git20110115.el6 @atrpms/6Workstation > libssh2.x86_64 1.2.7-1.el5.rf > @rpmforge/6Workstation > libva-0.32.0.1_1.x86_64 0.32.0-3_sds1.el6 @atrpms/6Workstation > libva-x11-0.32.0.1_1.x86_64 0.32.0-3_sds1.el6 @atrpms/6Workstation > perl-XML-Writer.noarch 0.612-1.el6.rf > @rpmforge/6Workstation > skype.i586 2.2.0.25-fc10 > @/skype-2.2.0.25-fedora.i586 > spice-usb-share.x86_64 4.9-9.el6 > @/spice-usb-share-4.9-9.el6.x86_64/6Workstation > tetex-xdvi.x86_64 3.0-33.8.el5_5.6 installed > virtio-win.noarch 1.1.16-0.el6 > @/virtio-win-1.1.16-0.el6.noarch/6Workstation > zhongyi-song-fonts.noarch 0.1.20020329.1-15.el6 > @SupplementInstallMedia/6Workstation > zhongyi-song-fonts-ghostscript.noarch > 0.1.20020329.1-15.el6 > @SupplementInstallMedia/6Workstation > > I had some conflicts so I disabled some testing repositories. > > Is there a repository from which I can update Java? Rip it out and replace it with openjdk. You'll be using what both Oracle and the upstream RHEL are collaborating on, and avoid a stack of Java incompatibility issues. If you need the Sun version of Java, you can grab RPM's from Oracle, but integration with older RHEL/CentOs/SL releases was awkward dueo to various integration components oriented around RHEL's particular rebundling of it for commercial customers in the "optional" channels. > But since I switched to SL, there have been no updates on the SL repo. Is > that ok? See above. Those are not GPL or freeware or normally "open sourced" packages: that's why JPackage does not provide bundled RPM's for them, but only framework ".nosrc.rpm"' packages that require manual download and agreement to the Java licensing to build. I published a few updates for those, and threw in the towel as wasted effort with RHEL 6 and RHEL 6 came out with very successful openjdk bundles. > Zoran > > -- > Zoran Ovcin, University of Novi Sad Faculty of Technical Sciences > Serbia, +381-(0)21-485-2298, mailto:[log in to unmask] > > >