up2date update

[DirectAdmin Support]

Hello,

I've created a simple little script that modifies the:
/etc/sysconfig/rhn/up2date
file to set the pkgSkipList and removeSkipList lines.

This is just a beta version for making up2date work, but we've run it on our file server and nothing broke.

To install it, follow these steps:
cd /usr/local/directadmin/scripts
wget http://files.directadmin.com/services/up2date.sh
chmod 755 up2date.sh
./up2date.sh
Then you should be able to run:
up2date -u
John

[RingToons]

Can you activate this option by difault in directadmin?

[DirectAdmin Support]

It should be included and run for the next release.

John

[RingToons]

Originally posted by DirectAdmin Support
It should be included and run for the next release.

John

Great, I wish I find directadmin faster than other panels!

[jlasman]

Originally posted by DirectAdmin Support
It should be included and run for the next release.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'and run'.

Doesn't up2date require a RHN membership?

Will you be keeping us up to date (no pun intended) on all the software in your exclude list?

Can you get this to work with apt, which doesn't require any memberships, and can use lots of different mirrors... and appears to be both faster and easier to use?

If you need information on apt-rpm for RH, let me know; I've been there, and done that :) .

Jeff

[DirectAdmin Support]

Hello,

By "run", I'm referring to the up2date.sh script, not up2date itself.

Apt might be a viable option, as you say, it requires no membership.

We'll keep you posted on the software in the list. Although you may have to do the updates, we'll generally include instructions on how to do it. DirectAdmin itself automatically updates itself.

John

[jlasman]

the nice thing about apt is you can set up your own RHL mirror, only putting in your own versions of programs that might otherwise break DA.

As I posted on another thread, I'll send you the apt info as soon as I find the link.

Jeff

[DigitalIsles]

I'll second the move to apt! I am a debian guy, and if we were to build our own mirrors, you could just decide what updates we should use and put them on the mirror, and then we can only use that mirror to update from?

See, it really would be quite simple..

-Robert

[jlasman]

Robert, if you don't already have apt for RHL let me know and I'll send you the same info I sent to John.

Jeff

[DigitalIsles]

I already have it.. I couldn't live without it.. Lazy I guess.. :D

-Robert

[RingToons]

I get:
Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-i386-7.3...
########################################

Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-i386-7.3...
########################################

Fetching rpm headers...
The following Packages were marked to be skipped by your configuration:

Name Version Rel Reason
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kernel 2.4.20 19.7 Pkg name/pattern
mod_perl 1.26 5 Pkg name/pattern
sendmail-cf 8.11.6 25.73Pkg name/pattern

None of the packages you requested were found, or they are already updated.
[root@server admin]#

Why can`t I download these updates?

[DirectAdmin Support]

Because they've been added to your rpm skip list. The only one that you can remove from the list is the kernel, but mod_perl and sendmail will both go venturing into unwanted territory.

To remove the kernel from the skiplist, run:up2date --nox --configure select 7, and type out the line, without including the kernel*. Repeat for option 21.

Removing any other packages from the skip list will most likely end up breaking things such as apache.

John

[jlasman]

John,

Could you be so kind as to either post or send me a copy of your skip list; I'd like to make sure my apt-get list is in sync so I don't have problems later.

Thanks!

Jeff

[DirectAdmin Support]

Hello,

From /etc/sysconfig/rhn/up2date:

pkgSkipList=kernel*;apache*;httpd**;mod_*;mysql*;MySQL*;da_*;*ftp*;exim*;sendmail*;php*;

removeSkipList=kernel*;apache*;mod_*;mysql*;MySQL*;da_*;*ftp*;exim*;sendmail*;php*;webalizer*;

(Those are supposed to be one line each (2 lines total))

John

[RingToons]

After up2date -u the follow:

Error communicating with server. The message was:
SSL_connect error

[jlasman]

Originally posted by RingToons
Error communicating with server. The message was:
SSL_connect error
Red Hat forgot to renew their cert.

Really. Here's a copy of their urgent email I got this morning at several addresses:
The certificate used by up2date and rhn_register to communicate with the
Red Hat Network reached its end of life on August 28th 2003. Users
attempting to connect to Red Hat Network will see SSL connection or
certificate verification failures.

New versions of the up2date and rhn_register clients are now available
which are required for continued access to Red Hat Network.

* RHSA-2003:267 for Red Hat Linux:
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2003-267.html

* RHSA-2003:268 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux:
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2003-268.html

New versions of the up2date client that contain the new certificate are
immediately available for download at:

https://rhn.redhat.com/help/latest-up2date.pxt

For users who would prefer to install the new certificate directly, it is
available at:

https://rhn.redhat.com/help/ssl_cert.pxt

- -the Red Hat Network Team

Jeff

[RingToons]

Stpid question maybe but how do I install: up2date-2.8.40-3.7.3.i386.rpm

[jlasman]

# rpm -Uvh up2date-2.8.40-3.7.3.i386.rpm

Jeff

[RingToons]

upload the file or wget?
I don`t understand linux well :(

[jlasman]

Well, first you have to have it. Get it any way you can.

I don't use up2date, I use apt-get.

So I can't give you exact details, but I believe the Urgent Red Hat letter you should have gotten from Red Hat should have the information on how/where to get it.

If you're not a member of Red Hat Network, that's where you have to start.

Jeff

[DirectAdmin Support]

Hello,

For anyone else having up2date issues, find the url to the rpm for your system through the links Jeff has provided.

The rpm should have i386.rpm at the end, and will be specific for your version of redhat. Once you find the url, follow these instructions (replace the url with your url):

cd
wget ftp://updates.redhat.com/9/en/os/i386/up2date-3.1.23.2-1.i386.rpm
rpm -Uvh up2date-3.1.23.2-1.i386.rpm

This example is for redhat 9.0.

John

[RingToons]

Error Message:
Your demo account has been disabled. To enable your account, you must
verify your email address by visiting:

https://rhn.redhat.com/network/account/change-email.pxt

You may also enable your account by purchasing Red Hat Network service at:

https://rhn.redhat.com/network/sales/index.pxt

Your account name: jprieajr
Current email on file: no@thanks.com
Error Class Code: 111
Error Class Info: Email address not validated; service disabled

How can I change this accountname and mail adres?

[jlasman]

If you have a password you should be able to log in with your username and password at the url you posted from the error message.

If you don't have a password you should probably just start over with a new username, email address and password.

You do need to use a valid email address.

RHN validates what they call demo accounts (only one system per account) by email addresses, so if you own an ISP or a domain you can have lots of "demo" accounts :) .

You do have to vist their site and respond to their surveys (which come annoyingly often) to keep your account current.

That's why I switched to apt-get, which is free as in beer (no charge) and as in speech (no limit).

Jeff

[RingToons]

Originally posted by jlasman
If you don't have a password you should probably just start over with a new username, email address and password.

You do need to use a valid email address.
Jeff

How do I start with a new user etc?

[jlasman]

Sometimes, RingToons, we have to do at least a bit of searching ourselves :) ...

Try:

https://rhn.redhat.com/

The last time I looked there was a link there to "create account"; I don't know if they still allow new "demo" accounts or not.

Jeff

[RingToons]

Originally posted by jlasman
Sometimes, RingToons, we have to do at least a bit of searching ourselves :) ...

Try:

https://rhn.redhat.com/

The last time I looked there was a link there to "create account"; I don't know if they still allow new "demo" accounts or not.

Jeff

I was hoping for a answer for the server.
On the server I must change the username and pass.

(so far so good)

[l0rdphi1]

up2date --register

I think, anyway

[jlasman]

As I mentioned, Phil, I no longer use up2date, so I'm not up-to-date on it (no pun intended).

I recall there was a recent email sent to Red Hat up2date members explaining how to upgrade up2date because the security cert had expired.

Perhaps that email gives enough information about up2date to figure out where the configuration file is, and perhaps someone who's reading this list can forward it to you.

If not, I'd start by doing:

# locate up2date

and see what I get.

Or switch to apt-get, as I keep hinting :) .

Jeff

[prophecy]

apt-get would be nice, don't like the price on up2date.

[jlasman]

I'm currently using apt-get and will publish a howto on installing it as soon as I can take the time.

I can also install it, but I don't log into other people's systems except under contract.

I'm still not 100% sure apt-get can be safely used in an automated mode, since DA installs so much by compilation rather than from rpm.

Jeff

[chuckd]

Hoorah for Fedora (http://fedora.redhat.com/) (aka community-devloped Red Hat), check this out from the release notes of recent betas:

"The Red Hat Update Agent (up2date) now supports installing packages from apt and yum repositories as well as local directories. This includes dependency solving and obsoletes handling. Additional repositories can be configured in the /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources file."

The first Fedora branded release is expected at the start of November. Hope DA gets onto it soon...

[jlasman]

Originally posted by chuckd
The first Fedora branded release is expected at the start of November. Hope DA gets onto it soon...
I'm not going to rain on your parade, but I do want to point out that ...

It took three years between the time Netscape created Mozilla and Mozilla actually became a reasonable solution.

Jumping on the Fedora bandwagon may or may not be a good idea. That's something we don't know yet and won't know until after we see the first release.

The biggest problem isn't whether or not up2date supports Fedora, or apt-get, or anything else, but whether or not there'll be a community offering RPMs to plug newly-discovered securities. And for how long after a release.

The fact that Fedora plans to create new releases several times a year is a major disadvantage, unless you always want to be behind, or always want to be on the bleeding edge, or always want to be rebuilding your systems.

For example, Red Hat has already dropped security updates for most retail versions of their operating systems, and will drop support for the rest by the end of April of 2004. Who, then, is going to update those repositories?

Stability is the most important thing you can have in a webhosting server; I'd rather have a system that needs rebooting once every two years than one that needs rebuilding twice a year.

And that's why I, for one, have committed to DA on FreeBSD, at least for the forseeable future.

Jeff

[chuckd]

Right on, I agree with you in that Fedora probably won't be great to run on production servers. In fact I'm planning on running RHEL. I wouldn't mind moving to FreeBSD but I don't have the energy to switch our servers.

This is a strange comment to me:
The fact that Fedora plans to create new releases several times a year is a major disadvantage
Ahm yes but then how many new releases did Red Hat used to make in a year? Answer: varies, but about 2 per year. And how many are Fedora going to make? 2/3 per year. Whoa, big difference. My production servers have only ever seen RH6.0(urgh, still have nightmares),6.2,7.1,9. There's no reason why it should be worse with Fedora - you wait out the releases until they're good enough or the current one's been obsolete (and that's generally the fault of the requirements of packages such as PHP & Perl long before RH's EOL).

The thing to note also when comparing Mozilla & Fedora is that Netscape was a pretty crap piece of software, open sourced to try and improve in quality & save money. It required a complete change in the way the code base was developed. It was a _long_ time till they made a usable release.

RHL, on the other hand, is a quality piece of software, opened up to increase the testing base & save Red Hat money. Red Hat have needed to make only simple changes to the way it's developed. They've already made 2 solid testing releases.

There are just too many people interested in Red Hat for it to fail to create a large enough community for support to be continued. For example there's already a project called Fedora Legacy (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy) which aims to maintain support for EOL'd Red Hat products.

Maybe community support will be better & longer than Red Hat provided... Heh one can dream :) .

Chuck

[jlasman]

Originally posted by chuckd
Right on, I agree with you in that Fedora probably won't be great to run on production servers. In fact I'm planning on running RHEL.
Either you're presuming DA will support RHEL, or you're planning on moving to another control panel.

Will I change your mind by pointing out that the price for RHEL is annual, and that before you get it you accept an agreement that they can walk into your office and physically audit you at any time to make sure you own one license for each server your run it on?
I wouldn't mind moving to FreeBSD but I don't have the energy to switch our servers.
I never switch pre-existing servers. I create new ones and every few years I clean out old ones. This year I retired a Sun Cobalt RaQ4; it took a bit over a week, and I only got one customer call, even though just about everything changed, including email logins. It was made easy by the fact that we weren't hosting php or MySQL on that server, so it held only static sites.

I also retired a Plesk system; that was a bit more complex because DA has a different naming convention for MySQL databases and users. But it went without a hitch as well.

In both cases we did it because we didn't trust the underlying operating systems anymore; the RaQ was running a system based on RHL 6.2, and the Plesk server RHL 7.1.
Ahm yes but then how many new releases did Red Hat used to make in a year?
It's not just how many releases but how long the releases were supported. And for fedora, that remains to be seen.
There's no reason why it should be worse with Fedora - you wait out the releases until they're good enough or the current one's been obsolete (and that's generally the fault of the requirements of packages such as PHP & Perl long before RH's EOL).
Or they become obsolete because no one's releasing RPMs to fix compromises; that's the biggest problem. With RH's new one year EOL security becomes a problem long before feature creep. Did the fedora project indicate how long their releases would get security updates?
RHL, on the other hand, is a quality piece of software, opened up to increase the testing base & save Red Hat money. Red Hat have needed to make only simple changes to the way it's developed. They've already made 2 solid testing releases.
As a business user to whom the stability of hosting software is of primary importance, I can't rely on hopes, guesses, and interpolations. I've got to feel comfortable that my software will stay supported, secure, and reliable. Perhaps Fedora will be the best thing since sliced bread. I won't rely on that, though, until it has a history. Especially since FreeBSD is out there, has a history, and is a very stable, supported and secure platform.

Perhaps I feel better about FreeBSD because I owned an ISP that relied on BSD (actually BSDi OS; the pay-for-license version) for years; I have a good bit of experience with BSD, and I'm not afraid to use it.
There are just too many people interested in Red Hat for it to fail to create a large enough community for support to be continued.
I hope you're right.
For example there's already a project called Fedora Legacy (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy) which aims to maintain support for EOL'd Red Hat products.
Thanks for this link; I'll check it out.

Jeff

[prophecy]

What's the benefits of running FreeBSD ?

[chuckd]

Originally posted by jlasman
Either you're presuming DA will support RHEL, or you're planning on moving to another control panel.

Hey, haven't installed any CP yet =). They all suck as far as I can tell. DA seems to suck the least but also doesn't do everything I need...

Is it really much of a presumption to think DA will support RHEL? Given its target market and the very little difference (for DA's purposes) between RHEL and basic RH. Or am I wrong?

Will I change your mind by pointing out that the price for RHEL is annual, and that before you get it you accept an agreement that they can walk into your office and physically audit you at any time to make sure you own one license for each server your run it on?

I didn't say my mind was made up...

But 1st: I think you mean the price for RHEL includes a year of support. It's not an annual license. 2nd: urgh, stupid legal goons but I'm not too concerned, if I decide to use it then I'm happy to pay for it as I should.

Still I agree with you about FreeBSD, damn fine piece of software. Solid community that cares about rock solid software. Probably would be fine for us now - a few years back it just wasn't feasible because our customers always wanted the latest PHP module/etc and getting them running on FreeBSD sucked.

Maybe I should make the effort. Heh...

=) Chuck

[jlasman]

Originally posted by chuckd
Hey, haven't installed any CP yet =). They all suck as far as I can tell.
I've thought for years now that the word suck has been overused by many of us in this business...

Be that as it may, you can always write your own, but you can't keep customers in today's world unless you offer them the ability to manage their own account.

I owned what may have been the first hosting company (certainly one of the first ten) beginning back in late '94 (sold it in mid '95). We took orders via email or over the phone, and made changes ourselves (using linux kernel version 0.99). That model no longer works. And it certainly doesn't scale.
DA seems to suck the least but also doesn't do everything I need...
What do you need?
Is it really much of a presumption to think DA will support RHEL? Given its target market and the very little difference (for DA's purposes) between RHEL and basic RH. Or am I wrong?
The only panel I know of that has announced support for RHEL is Plesk, and I don't think they've formally announced it on their website yet (we're still listed by them as a Gold Partner). I think you're wrong, because I don't think too many hosting companies are going to be willing to pay <> $1,500/year/server for RHEL.
I think you mean the price for RHEL includes a year of support. It's not an annual license.
Oh yes it is... here's a quote from section 4 of their license (REPORTING AND AUDIT):
The amount of the payment deficiency will be determined by multiplying the number of underreported Installed Systems or Services by the annual fee for such item.
They certainly do expect you to pay annually per server.
Still I agree with you about FreeBSD, damn fine piece of software. Solid community that cares about rock solid software. Probably would be fine for us now - a few years back it just wasn't feasible because our customers always wanted the latest PHP module/etc and getting them running on FreeBSD sucked.

Maybe I should make the effort. Heh...
Maybe you should :) .

Jeff

[chuckd]

Originally posted by jlasman
I've thought for years now that the word suck has been overused by many of us in this business...

It seems quite suited to me. I've been quite surprised at the low quality of the available CPs. Indeed as you recommended we did write our own but I didn't have the energy to keep adding features such that it would compare with the ones out there. It lets people change their aliases, that's #1 requirement for most of our users. Of course a reseller system would be nice.

What do you need?

A reseller system - pretty standard requirement, most of my customers are web designers who have maybe 10 sites each. A domain management system (i.e. User part of DA) - add/remove POP3/IMAP accounts, manage FTP users, etc.

DA seems quite nice to me, the main issue now is IMAP support (we need it). Other than that I'm looking to get it running within a few days.

They certainly do expect you to pay annually per server.

That quote from the agreement doesn't say that buying RHEL is buying an annual fee. It seems to cover the case in which it did though. Of course you do have to pay for RHN access but so then what's changed? And I don't know how you get a $1500/year figure - Enterprise Server (which you'd use for web servers/etc) is $349 for the Basic edition. Assuming RHEN costs are similar to RHN (maybe a bad assumption), you'd then be paying $60/year after the first year for RHN access. After 2 years you'd probably upgrade, another $349 I assume. Yeah it's not great but it's still quite a lot less than you pay for most CP software, and interestingly close to the cost of DA (assuming the $29/month rate, $348/year).

Not that I'm defending the costs particularly or saying it's amazingly cheap, just correcting your hyperbole...

[jlasman]

Not that I'm defending the costs particularly or saying it's amazingly cheap, just correcting your hyperbole...
My hyperbole (as you put it) comes from discussions months ago with a RedHat Press Representative, soon after the Enterprise products were announced.

Since I'm not interested in buying the product I haven't called back, but I will, and I'll try to get to the bottom of this.

Jeff

[3josh]

The up2date mods are now done as part of the latest install
scripts correct?

-3j

[jlasman]

Originally posted by jlasman
I haven't called back, but I will, and I'll try to get to the bottom of this.
As of this morning's telephone call things are getting a bit more interesting.

According to salesrep John, the product remains open source and they can't stop me from using it on multiple machines if I purchase one, and then create new binaries from the source I'm entitled to as a buyer. But the distributed binaries, he says, are still only usable on one system.

(And that makes sense if you read the open source license under which Linux is distributed.)

He says that if I have multiple systems running from the source I can still get updates for the single machine licensed, but I can't use the binaries of these updates on additional machines.

He suggested I write legal@redhat.com for further information.

Frankly, I think his answer just adds more FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) to the entire Red Hat product line. When they first announced this new distribution method I felt they had finally done what Microsoft couldn't do: sow the seeds of their eventual destruction.

I don't think this discussion with their salesrep did anything to make me feel any better. I won't be betting my future on Red Hat Linux.

Whether or not I end up using any Fedora products on webservers will depend on their quality, value to me, and support available for them from DirectAdmin specifically, and from Control Panel vendors in general.

I've already decided that Red Hat is not the best desktop; I shall continue to experiment with the Knoppix install of Debian for the desktop. This discussion doesn't belong on this board, but we do now use Linux desktops almost exclusively and I'll be happy to discuss this with others, either privately (please email rather than send a private message on the board) or perhaps on another forum.

Here, in case it's important to you, are the server-level packages that are NOT included in their low-priced WS solution (taken from their website):

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1: dhcp, dns, ftp, gated, imap, iscsi, pxe, tux, uucp, amanda, anonftp, ypserv, inews, isicom, squid, routed, sliplogin, mailman, wu-ftpd, bootparamd

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3: amanda-server, arptables_jf, bind, caching-nameserver, dhcp, freeradius, inews, inn, krb5-server, netdump-server, openldap-servers, pxe, quagga, radvd, rarpd, redhat-config-bind, redhat-config-netboot, tftp-server, tux, vsftpd, ypserv

Jeff

[jlasman]

Originally posted by chuckd There are just too many people interested in Red Hat for it to fail to create a large enough community for support to be continued. For example there's already a project called Fedora Legacy (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy) which aims to maintain support for EOL'd Red Hat products.
But as of today there isn't any support :( .

I see no reason to stick with RH at this point; I'm busy experimenting with FreeBSD.

Jeff

[jlasman]

Looking at the new fedora pages at fedora.redhat.com, it looks like it's going to be a long time before there's an easily-installable, working release of Fedora on which to install DA or any other control panel, for that matter.

Jeff

[chuckd]

What makes you say that?

http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/schedule/

They've already made 3 test releases, the first "production" release is set for November 3. I haven't run the test releases myself, but from my reading there doesn't seem to have been any more problems than Rawhide releases have had in the past.

It's got exactly the same installer as Red Hat 9 plus it's already got extra features like a simplified firewall configurator & VNC based install (pop the CD into your new server, specify VNC, then complete the install from the comfort of your desktop PC).

I still don't see why such pessimism is called for. Sure, it could all go sour, but at the moment things are looking on track to me.

[jlasman]

I should have said:

"Looking at posts on the fedora mailing list at:

http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

it looks as if there are still a lot of problems with Fedora."

My error. I urge anyone interested in Fedora to subscribe to the list, and decide for yourself whether you think it's stable enough for your use.

I will defend my pessimism by pointing out our data center has in excess of 50 servers, probably 40 of them still running secure implementations of RHL 6.2, most of the rest running secure implementations of RHL 7.3.

Pessimism is an important part of our operation when I want to make sure our servers continue to run and support websites without failure.

For example, one of our clients was looking at installing RHL 9 on a new system running Plesk Server Administrator. It took a few days of research to determine that:

1) some of his clients were dependent on Apache modules not yet available in Apache 2, which is the version installed by default with RHL 9.

2) some of his clients were dependent on GD library version 2, which we've already successfully installed on RHL 7.3, but with which we have no experience on RHL 9 (RHL by defult still uses GD library 1.x on all current shipping versions).

3) Some of his clients are dependent on a version of Cold Fusion (CF 5) that we know runs on RHL 7.3, but we have no experience with his clients' websites running on later versions of Cold Fusion nor do we have experience with CF 5 running on later versions of RHL.

4) RHL 9 runs on a completely different set of system libraries than does RHL 7.3, which may cause either failures or instabilities in lots of other software.

Red Hat has a reputation for "bleeding edge" Linux development, which isn't always the best place to be when you're hosting thousands of websites.

Your mileage may certainly vary, but once we build a server we expect it to last approximately four years, and we don't expect to change the operating system it runs on (except for security patches). Ideally we'd rather not reboot it for the entire four years, though in practice we seldom get more than 3 - 6 months between reboots.

We've been hosting since late 1995, and so far this model has been quite successful for us.

If it were me creating DA (and it's certainly NOT me), I'd look for platforms with long-term stability.

When Red Hat numbered versions ran for several years and were supported (for seucrity issues) for several years after that, Red Hat was the best choice. If that happens again with Fedora, Fedora could again become the best choice. However Fedora (imho) is NOT a continuation of the old Red Hat; it's a redefinition of the new one. And from my point of view the jury is still out.

There's nothing I'd like better than a stability in RH, so I could stick with it for the forseeable future (I'm only six years away from retirement :) ), but I don't see that happening.

Jeff

[Winta]

I want to use up2date but before i can use that i have to use rhn_register when trying to register i get the message
A socket error occured: host not found, attempt #1
A socket error occured: host not found, attempt #2
etc
Does anyone know what the problem can be

[jlasman]

What version of RHL are you running?

Did you get the new version of up2date ? (See posts on this board, on Red Hat, and on Fedora sites and lists, or perhaps someone else can help you since I don't use up2date.)

Red Hat may have stopped taking free registrations to RHN, since their model now is to only support RHEL, and to charge lots of money per year for the memberships.

Jeff

[Winta]

I use RH 7.3
What is the best option to choose since RH is charging money for there OS.

[jlasman]

I don't believe you can use up2date or RHN anymore on for RHL 7.3.

RHN is now only available for their distributions under the name RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux).

Because neither DA nor any of the other server administration companies appear to have made clear direction statements for future distributions of various linux distributors, and because DA is NOT YET supporting RHEL, I'm currently investigating using FreeBSD for future hosting systems. FreeBSD appears to be supported strongly both by DA and by other hosting platforms.

I can't consider Fedora Linux (the new community-supported and free linux distribution that has grown from Red Hat roots) because the developers plan a complete upgrade schedule of twice a year and security support of a new version for only one year; we need more longevity than that and more support, and more stability.

Certifying a new OS here, for our own use takes time, so as recently as today I'm still installing DA on RHL 7.3.

Here's how I keep it up-to-date:

First, immediately after installation I use apt-get (modified for RHL and to handle RPMs) to update the server to the latest software packages before Red Hat dropped support at the end of last year.

Using apt-get for RPM is really quite simple, especially using the program I use.

I use the apt--get program now kept at:

https://moin.conectiva.com.br/AptRpm

and at

http://freshmeat.net/projects/apt-rpm/?branch_id=38558&release_id=155182

but there's a complete different program at:

http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/

Once that's done, you still need to get more recent updates. I use two sources to make sure I get all the updates:

One is The Fedora Legacy Project; you can join the Federal-legacy-announce mailing list here:
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-announce

You can also get information about the Fedora Legacy project, and information on using apt-get here:

http://www.fedoralegacy.org/download

I also buy a commercial service from Progeny, which requires manual installation of all the updates.

See:

http://transition.progeny.com/

If all this sounds a bit daunting, you can buy an update service from us and we'll do all the work for you :) . I'm not allowed to mention prices here, but since just yesterday I got an email from Mark mentioning I could offer my services, I'll say that my offerings page isn't completed yet but I'll be happy to send anyone information.

Jeff

[HVBarry]

I have been using apt-get for quite a long time now. I would like to make a standard conf file for all of our directadmin servers here at work. If someone could post one I would appreciate it. Has any tried yum to do this yet? That is pretty much what I use on all of my redhat based oses. Anyways any help would be appreciated.

Thank you
Barry

[HVBarry]

I went ahead and figured this out on my own. I am updating a redhat 9 box so I first downloaded apt-get and installed it from here http://apt.freshrpms.net/ then I edited the /etc/apt/apt.conf file to look like this

// $Id: apt.conf,v 1.10 2003/06/16 10:22:32 dude Exp $
// See the apt.conf(5) man page for syntax and all available options

APT {
Clean-Installed "false";
Get {
Assume-Yes "false";
Download-Only "false";
Show-Upgraded "true";
Fix-Broken "false";
Ignore-Missing "false";
Compile "false";
};
};

Acquire {
Retries "0";
Http {
Proxy ""; // http://user:pass@host:port/
}
};

RPM {
Ignore { "php*"; "sendmail*"; "exim*"; "proftp*"; "da_*"; "MySQL*"; "mysql*"; "mod_*"; "httpd*"; "apache*"; "kernel*"; "w
ebalizer"; "apache*" };
Hold { "php*"; "sendmail*"; "exim*"; "proftp*"; "da_*"; "MySQL*"; "mysql*"; "mod_*"; "httpd*"; "apache*"; "kernel*"; "web
alizer"; "apache*" };
Allow-Duplicated { "^kernel$"; "^kernel-"; "^gpg-pubkey$" };
Options { };
Install-Options "";
Erase-Options "";
Source {
Build-Command "rpmbuild --rebuild";
};
};


The only part you have to change is
Ignore { }
to
Ignore { "php*"; "sendmail*"; "exim*"; "proftp*"; "da_*"; "MySQL*"; "mysql*"; "mod_*"; "httpd*"; "apache*"; "kernel*"; "w
ebalizer"; "apache*" };

and
Hold { }
Hold { "php*"; "sendmail*"; "exim*"; "proftp*"; "da_*"; "MySQL*"; "mysql*"; "mod_*"; "httpd*"; "apache*"; "kernel*"; "web
alizer"; "apache*" };


This should work on any redhat based os so download and install the pat-get version for your redhat distro! Always edit the conf file before running apt-get update or you will have to uninstall and reinstall to get it not to exclude packages.

If you need any help shot me an email!
Thank you

[jlasman]

Barry,

What apt-get repositories are you using?

Jeff

[HVBarry]

Jeff

ayo.freshrpms.net
is the default mirror if you get apt-get from freshrpms.net I just left that repository I have used it for awhile now. Here is a link to all the apt rpms http://ayo.freshrpms.net/

Here is a list of repositories listed on freshrpms.net

http://freshrpms.net/apt/repositories.html

A few known public apt repositories for entire Red Hat Linux releases (and eventually add-on packages) :

* http://apt.freshrpms.net/ - Red Hat Linux 6.2, 7.x, 8.0 and 9 (with freshrpms)
* http://apt.au.freshrpms.net/ - Red Hat Linux 6.2, 7.x, 8.0 and 9 (with freshrpms) provided by Planetmirror
* http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/apt/ - Red Hat Linux 7.x, 8.0, 9 and Rawhide (with freshrpms)
* http://ftp.uninett.no/pub/linux/apt/ - Red Hat Linux 5.x to 9 and Rawhide (with freshrpms)
* http://apt-rpm.tuxfamily.org/ - Red Hat Linux 6.2, 7.3, 8.0 and 9
* http://redhat.usu.edu/ - Red Hat Linux 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and 9
* ftp://mirror.pa.msu.edu/apt/ - Red Hat Linux 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and 9
* http://apt.42h.de/ - Red Hat Linux 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and 9
* http://apt-rpm.codefactory.se/ - Red Hat Linux 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and a few extras

A few known apt repositories carrying only custom packages :

* http://people.ecsc.co.uk/~matt/repository.html - Lots of custom Red Hat Linux 9 GNOME 2 and related packages

Many more custom packages available through apt can be found on the general links page.

General information and misc. links :

* http://moin.conectiva.com.br/AptRpm - Conectiva's AptRpm port page
* http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/ - General server-side information and perl scripts to create repositories
* http://www.nongnu.org/synaptic/ - Synaptic (apt graphical frontend) homepage

Let me know if you have any other questions!

[jep]

I *always* get:

rpmdb: unable to join the environment
error: db4 error(11) from dbenv->open: Resource temporarily unavailable
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - Resource temporarily unavailable (11)
error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm

On all servers. And that sucks. :)

[HVBarry]

Woah! I provide server administration if you would like me too look at it. Sounds like you have something going on bad! I can't be sure what it is till I look at the server. Maybe try uninstalling and reinstall ing rpm.

[jep]

Well, every new installed (offline) server also has this problem. I have it on all different hardware, fedora core and redhat. So I guess it not my fault. :)

[HVBarry]

Thats always a plus are you just doing like rpm -ivh package.rpm or rpm -Uvh package.rpm when this happens ? Let me know what exactly you are doing and I will try to help.

[jep]

It happens on rpm -i and rpm -u. A reboot helps, but Linux shouldn't reboot.

When I google on this issue, I find a lot of people having this problems with RPM.

[HVBarry]

I have had it happen before but I dont remember what the problem wasit was so long ago. I haven't had it happen recently and I work on a lot of servers with rpm. I dont ever do installs with just rpm -i I always do rpm -ivh or rpm -Uvh. I dont know if that has something to do with it or not. I guess I would have to look at the servers to find the issues answer!

[jep]

Well, we manage about 100 of them. So I have people who can have a look. I was just grmbl'ing. :)

Thanks anyway..

[jlasman]

Originally posted by jep
rpmdb: unable to join the environment
It's amazing what you can find when you type the entire line quoted above into Google and click on "Feeling Lucky".

Try it.

and try some of the other hits as well.

Jeff

[Vincent]

Question, is it safe to use up2date.sh form /usr/local/directadmin/scripts/ ?? or not ?

Gr,
Vincent

[jlasman]

Note that you're responding to a post only weeks under three years old.

If the script is included in DirectAdmin it should be okay to use.

Of course you should read it first so you know what it does.

It appears to be a script to add excludes, as mentioned in some of the yum configuration threads in these forums. So after running it you should probably run up2date with the appropriate command to see what's in the exclude directive.

Jeff