I’m on openSUSE 12.1 x86_64, and I’m on the way to add some repos I normally use.
First I’m trying to add those needed to install multimedia codecs, which are Packman and Libdvdcss according to installation guides in the Multimedia section. I normally checked repos’ urls here (opensuse.org site), but when checking in Yast, Software repositories, Community Repositories, Packman’s url is different. In openSUSE site Packman is Index of /suse/openSUSE_12.1/, while in Yast it’s Index of /suse/12.1/. So did Packman change again? Which one is the correct? Is Libdvdcss repo also different? Who should I follow, openSUSE site or Yast?
Then there are the other repos I’d like to add since I used them for updating KDE and the other apps: KDE, Mozilla, Wine. openSUSE site seems a bit outdated regarding 12.1 repos, though I already saw they already exist. However strangely they don’t appear in Yast Community Repos list. Why don’t they appear there? Can I use these repos to keep apps updated, or should I look into openSUSE repos?
And finally, does Firefox 8 works well on 12.1, or does it have bugs? Also Wine repo seems to really provide last Wine version…
Thanks for your help.
They are the same
But use this one
Index of /suse/openSUSE_12.1/
Just follow the guide.
I don’t use kde-updated apps
But use Mozilla and Wine
Though I have synced Wine to my HD at a good working point for me. I’ll keep that for the time I use 12.1
Firefox is OK from Mozilla
But remember - the fewer repos you can manage with, the better.
So is it bad to update KDE?
Are these the right repos for 12.1?
Index of /repositories/mozilla/openSUSE_12.1
Index of /repositories/Emulators:/Wine/openSUSE_12.1
Because in libdvscss case I can’t browse it, says “was not found” or “you don’t have permission to access”.
These are correct
And you cannot browse libdvdcss
It depends on how important cutting edge is as opposed to stability. Everyone needs to make their own decision on this.
In the early days of KDE4 one needed to update KDE4 to get the best stability. Now KDE4 is mature and IMHO the opposite is true, as one slightly risks instability with a new cutting edge KDE4 version. While a LOT of testing is conducted by volunteers in support of the latest KDE4, its not as large as the testing effort that goes into the KDE4 version that is nominally packaged with a new openSUSE release. Ergo with a cutting edge released KDE4, one is more at risk of an incompatibility with various applications, or even fundamental aspects such as sound, during a cutting edge KDE4 update, than one is with a stock KDE4 release with openSUSE. Each person needs to make their own assessment as to the risk. Some average to advanced users always update their KDE4 and they swear by that approach.
Some users try to achieve a higher level of integrated stability with a more cutting edge KDE4 version (than stock) by adopting Tumbleweed. But with Tumbleweed one opens the door to more than just cutting edge KDE4 updates, as one gets more cutting edge updates across the board for many applications. And despite the efforts of a superb Tumbleweed packager and the Tumbleweed volunteer testers, again, the testing is less than with a stock openSUSE release.
And then there are those stick in the muds like myself, who prefer stability above most other considerations, and we typically lag a new release by many months on our main PCs. With today’s stable stock KDE4, installing an updated KDE4 for users like myself is never a consideration.
Thanks, mr. Oldcpu.
Now I have a last doubt, for now. These are my repos right now:
| Alias | Nombre | Activado | Actualizar | Prioridad | Tipo | URI | Servicio
1 | Actualizaciones-para-openSUSE-12.1-12.1-1.4 | Actualizaciones para openSUSE 12.1 12.1-1.4 | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | Index of /update/12.1 |
2 | Nvidia | Nvidia | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | ftp://download.nvidia.com/opensuse/12.1/ |
3 | Packman | Packman | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | Index of /suse/openSUSE_12.1/ |
4 | Wine | Wine | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | Index of /repositories/Emulators:/Wine/openSUSE_12.1 |
5 | download.opensuse.org-mozilla | Mozilla | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | Index of /repositories/mozilla/openSUSE_12.1 |
6 | openSUSE-12.1-12.1-1.4 | openSUSE-12.1-12.1-1.4 | Si | No | 99 | yast2 | cd:///?devices=/dev/disk/by-id/ata-TSSTcorp_DVD+_-RW_TS-L632D,/dev/sr0 |
7 | opensuse-guide.org-repo | Libdvdcss | Si | Si | 99 | rpm-md | http://opensuse-guide.org/repo/12.1/ |
8 | repo-debug | openSUSE-12.1-Debug | No | Si | 99 | NONE | Index of /debug/distribution/12.1/repo/oss |
9 | repo-debug-update | openSUSE-12.1-Update-Debug | No | Si | 99 | NONE | Index of /debug/update/12.1 |
10 | repo-non-oss | openSUSE-12.1-Non-Oss | Si | Si | 99 | yast2 | Index of /distribution/12.1/repo/non-oss |
11 | repo-oss | openSUSE-12.1-Oss | Si | Si | 99 | yast2 | Index of /distribution/12.1/repo/oss |
12 | repo-source | openSUSE-12.1-Source | No | Si | 99 | NONE | Index of /source/distribution/12.1/repo/oss |
I had to disable Apper due to its discused “bug” (asking for root permission whenever it wants, then disappearing, then again…). Caf explained he did updates through Yast by selecting “update if there’s newer version” in System repo. But if I just want to apply security updates and patches just like Apper (or whatever automatic updates are) did, which repo is the good one? Thanks.
Security updates are done with
Or use Yast > Online Update
But both these can break some switches you have on Packman
Yes, that happened once on 11.3. Automatic Updates were conflicting with a Mozilla repo file (the “nspr” one). It was the first time I had an issue like that, I don’t remember what I ended doing. But I guess it should be good to have the system updated someway…
So if that’s the risk, how do you bypass or workaround it? How do you keep your system well updated without using Apper?
I use the package switcher on my various repos, doing it last on Packman
Then I do this
A couple of times a week
I guess System repo is where security updates and other Apper stuff is? Wouldn’t that also bring the same risk of breaking other repos’ packages?
Also, a friend (the one who taught me Linux for first time) told me one should be very carefull when applying switch to Packman since it was a messing up of miscelaneus software, or not to do it at all. Is that why you leave this to second-to-last, just before System repo?
Finally, would adding Kernel repo be useful? And I thought you didn’t use KDE repos, or I just misunderstood…
Security updates come through the Update repo
If you don’t install the Packman versions of some programs (amarok, kaffeine), the programs will be crippled, i.e. play no mp3 for example. The reason why Packman is chosen to be the last, is to make sure that every app which should be switched to the Packman version, has been installed. Otherwise one would have to repeat the “switch” to Packman over and over again.
Why add a newer kernel. We already have kernel 3.1 coming with openSUSE 12.1, there’s no revolutionary changes since 3.1 was released.
So, either using Update repo or entire System repo, wouldn’t that bring back the risk of breaking other repos’ packages?
My believe is System refers to all software of all repos installed…
Besides, did you mean apply switch to ALL repos including default openSUSE ones, or just to the ones you added and excluding openSUSE ones? All this before applying update on System repo.
When you add a repo Eg: Mozilla
Use the switcher on it. It’s not necessary to use it on the OSS, NON-OSS or Update repo (Unless there are some very special reason)
Or Wine repo
Use the switcher on it
Let me though paint a scenario.
You have an established install running nicely and the last switch you used was on Packman
But now, you decide you need some kde extras and improvements and decide to use the Release repo + it’s Extra counterpart
You’ll need to use the switcher on these repos
But when you do, it’ll switch some packages from Packman > KDE (k3b, amarok, smplayer, ktorrent… to mention a few)
So in such a situation you need to then use the switch on Packman again
Of course, the same scenario but adding the Wine repo would not require a switch on Packman again
Because there are no packages in Wine, that are also in Packman
In time, you’ll learn which repos are likely to affect Packman or at least the signs will become obvious to you.
So once the system is all installed and switched finally to Packman
You can update in the manner shown
If you don’t want all the software updates it may mean you have to think on your feet a little when applying patches
My guess is the best method would be disable everything but OSS, NON-OSS and Update
The run zypper patch
But as I said, it may break the switch on an odd Packman package. An option here would be to beforehand, when Packman is enable to view it in software manager and right click > all in this list > protected do not modify
That should lock all packman from any change
Sorry to be mr. question/doubt again…
So I first applied switch to my repos without touching the openSUSE ones at all, and leaving Packman the last.
Now told System repo to update if newer version was available. All updates appear to me in blue, meaning no downgrades, and also in Update repo (I think Update is in fact a subset of System…). No changes in the other repos where I applied switch. Am I OK until this point?
Should I do the locking packages trick should I encounter a downgrade or conflict just like the Mozilla nspr?
Or, is it worth to have the system well updated?
is it worth to have the system well updated?
That’s what I do
That’s what I recommended
Locking was an option to you if you felt you didn’t want or could afford the bandwidth for regular software updates
Thank you very much for your help again. mr. Caf.
I think there’s a final doubt for now. From what have been discussed, I understand we’re giving Packman certain kind of “preference” over the other repos, even over KDE if I added it. Then I remembered what my friend told me: Packman was a messing up of miscelaneus software, so one should be very careful with switch, due to possible downgrades or conflicts.
Why do we give Packman repo that “preference”? What do you think about Packman being a “messing up of software”?
If you add a kde repo you switch to it
Using the switch again on packman simply switches those few packages in kde that we need from Packman
Your friend I am afraid is mistaken
Packman was a messing up of miscelaneus software
This simply not true.
Packman packagers work with openSUSE to provide a reliable source of uncrippled multimedia packages.
Of course, your friend could always air his unfounded accusations here. We may all be enlightened.