When checking for packages that depend on a particular package (in this case lz4) using rpm it does not list any packages that require either lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.i686 and lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.x86_64...
# rpm -q --whatrequires lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.i686
no package requires lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.i686
# rpm -q --whatrequires lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.x86_64
no package requires lz4-1.7.5-2.el7.x86_64
#
But I can't uninstall either of them without using rpm --nodeps as they appear to be needed by systemd and/or systemd-libs.
# rpm --erase --allmatches lz4
error: Failed dependencies:
liblz4.so.1()(64bit) is needed by (installed) systemd-libs-219-57.el7_5.1.x86_64
liblz4.so.1()(64bit) is needed by (installed) systemd-219-57.el7_5.1.x86_64
liblz4.so.1 is needed by (installed) systemd-libs-219-57.el7_5.1.i686
#
It looks like the output of rpm --whatrequires is wrong but is it? (I doubt that it is actually wrong - but I don't understand why doesn't it include systemd or systemd-libs?
I thought if using rpm --erase --test instead of rpm --whatrequires to identify if packages that have dependencies but is there another more reliable way to do this?
Thanks for your help.
this is a bit tricky. rpm --whatrequires tracks capabilities; not simply packages.
If you try again; you will see that:
rpm --whatrequires "liblz4.so.1()(64bit)"
will provide you the results.
rpm --erase --test seems a good way to go for me. An alternative would be to loop over the capabilities provided by the package that you want to remove; but that will be slower. Here is a small bash script that loops over the capabilities of lz4 and prints the packages who depend on those capabilities:
packageToRemove=lz4
for capability in $(rpm -q $packageToRemove --provides | awk '{print $1}')
do
echo "packages requiring $capability:"
rpm -q --whatrequires "$capability"
done
The following command gives me the result I was expecting though I still don't yet understand why rpm --whatrequires doesn't work. (I probably won't figure that out until I build my first package).
# repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires --cache --installed lz4
systemd-0:219-57.el7.x86_64
systemd-libs-0:219-57.el7.i686
systemd-libs-0:219-57.el7.x86_64
#
In some cases however the output can be "interesting"...
# repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires --cache --installed lvm2-libs
lvm2-7:2.02.177-4.el7.x86_64
lvm2-libs-7:2.02.177-4.el7.x86_64
#
# repoquery --whatrequires --cache --installed lvm2
lvm2-7:2.02.177-4.el7.x86_64
#
Related
I'm new to yocto, my goal is to add a printer driver to the yocto image of imx6 so that we can access the priter from the board. i was trying a build, following the instructions at IMXLXYOCTOUG.PDF.
$ DISTRO=fsl-imx-xwayland MACHINE=imx6qsabresd source fsl-setup-release.sh -b build_dir
$ source setup-environment build_dir
$ bitbake fsl-image-qt5-validation-imx
the basic build was successful, i brought up the board with gui, things were fine.
i wanted to add printer support to the image, so ive added meta-printing (https://github.com/rossburton/meta-printing) layer. i've updated bblayer.conf
BBFILES ?= ""
BBLAYERS = " \
${BSPDIR}/sources/poky/meta \
${BSPDIR}/sources/poky/meta-poky \
\
${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-openembedded/meta-oe \
${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-openembedded/meta-multimedia \
\
${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-freescale \
${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-freescale-3rdparty \
${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-freescale-distro \
**${BSPDIR}/sources/meta-printing \**
as per the instruction in README from github.
Later after booting i was not able to access lp command to print some sample file with the printer. so i added
IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " cups"
in local.conf file which is giving me this error below..
| checking for posix_spawn... yes
| checking for tm_gmtoff member in tm structure... yes
| checking for st_gen member in stat structure... no
| checking for removefile... no
| configure: error: Need pkg-config to enable libusb support.
| NOTE: The following config.log files may provide further information.
| NOTE: /home/jifri/on_board/yocto/imx-yocto-bsp/build_dir/tmp/work/cortexa9hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi/cups/2.1.4-r0/cups-2.1.4/config.log
| ERROR: configure failed
| WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command.
| ERROR: Function failed: do_configure (log file is located at /home/jifri/on_board/yocto/imx-yocto-bsp/build_dir/tmp/work/cortexa9hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi/cups/2.1.4-r0/temp/log.do_configure.8342)
ERROR: Task (/home/jifri/on_board/yocto/imx-yocto-bsp/sources/meta-printing/recipes-printing/cups/cups_2.1.4.bb:do_configure) failed with exit code '1'
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 5414 tasks of which 5399 didn't need to be rerun and 2 failed.
Summary: 2 tasks failed:
/home/jifri/on_board/yocto/imx-yocto-bsp/sources/meta-epson/recipes-epson/bbepson/bbepson_0.1.bb:do_compile
/home/jifri/on_board/yocto/imx-yocto-bsp/sources/meta-printing/recipes-printing/cups/cups_2.1.4.bb:do_configure
Summary: There were 4 ERROR messages shown, returning a non-zero exit code.
i have the pkg-config installed on my host PC
$ pkg-config --version
0.29.1
$ sudo apt-get install libusb-0.1-4
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
libusb-0.1-4 is already the newest version (2:0.1.12-28).
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
snap-confine snapd-login-service
Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 45 not upgraded.
$ sudo apt-get install libusb-1.0-0-dev
[sudo] password for eldaas:
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
libusb-1.0-0-dev is already the newest version (2:1.0.20-1).
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
snap-confine snapd-login-service
Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 45 not upgraded.
Any idea why
configure: error: Need pkg-config to enable libusb support.
is happening.
or
is it the right way / is there any better methord to get the lp command running on imx6 through yocto. so that i can access the printer..
any input is apretiated..
Thank you.
I've solved the same. actually I've added meta-printing layer to get the access to cups. but cups were already existing along with the meta layer in poky (imx-yocto-bsp/sources/poky/meta/recipes-extended/cups). so I removed meta-printing layer & then updated build/conf/local.conf with
IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " cups"
This worked for me and after booting I was able to use lp, lpadmin etc.. commands on my imx6 board.
I'm just learning making rpm packages for some custom builds of software that gets compiled from source (some legacy stuff needs this, so I'm trying to learn, as some packages can't use the latest versions), but hitting an error (I'm doing this in Vagrant, and also as root, but typically I'm trying not to use root as I'm aware it has potential for damage, its just this example seems to need some root changes).
sudo rpmbuild -ba testspec.spec --define "_topdir /tmp/"
So far it looks to be using the directory I expected, /tmp/rpmbuild
make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/rpmbuild/BUILD/exim-4.80.1/build-Linux-x86_64/pdkim'
make[2]: `pdkim.a' is up to date.
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/rpmbu
But then I see these errors...
/usr/lib/rpm/brp-compress: line 8: cd: /tmp/BUILDROOT/custom-exim-4.80.1-1.x86_64: No such file or directory
+ /usr/lib/rpm/brp-strip
find: `/tmp/BUILDROOT/custom-exim-4.80.1-1.x86_64': No such file or directory
+ /usr/lib/rpm/brp-strip-static-archive
find: `/tmp/BUILDROOT/custom-exim-4.80.1-1.x86_64': No such file or directory
+ /usr/lib/rpm/brp-strip-comment-note
So it now seems to be looking in /tmp/BUILDROOT
I'm new to rpmbuild, and don't quite understand some of the process.
My test spec file is at...
%define myversion exim-4.80.1
##%define mybase %{getenv:HOME}
%define mybase /tmp
%define _topdir %{mybase}/rpmbuild
%define _tmppath %{mybase}/rpmbuild/tmp
%define name custom-exim
%define release 1
%define version 4.80.1
%define buildroot %{_topdir}/%{name}-%{version}-root
BuildRoot: %{buildroot}
Summary: %{name}
Name: %{name}
Version: %{version}
Release: %{release}
Source0: ftp://exim.noris.de/exim/exim4/old/exim-4.80.1.tar.gz
License: GPLv1+
Group: Language
AutoReq: no
AutoProv: no
Requires: db4-devel pcre-devel libdb-devel libXt-devel libXaw-devel
%description
Custom Exim Build
%prep
#Do the following manually before building rpm
#mkdir -p /tmp/rpmbuild/BUILD /tmp/rpmbuild/SPECS /tmp/rpmbuild/SOURCES /tmp/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT /tmp/rpmbuild/RPMS /tmp/rpmbuild/SRPMS
#wget ftp://exim.noris.de/exim/exim4/old/exim-4.80.1.tar.gz -O /tmp/rpmbuild/SOURCES/exim-4.80.1.tar.gz
%setup -q -n %{myversion}
grep exim /etc/passwd || useradd -c "Exim" -d /var/spool/exim -m -s /bin/bash exim
%build
# exim needs to config changes before compiling, may do these first and repackage
cp %{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/src/EDITME %{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/Local/Makefile
cp %{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/exim_monitor/EDITME %{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/Local/eximon.conf
sed -i -e 's/EXIM_USER=$/EXIM_USER=exim/g' "%{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/Local/Makefile"
sed -i -e 's/LOOKUP_DNSDB=yes/#LOOKUP_DNSDB=yes/g' "%{mybase}/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{myversion}/Local/Makefile"
make
%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
#%{__mkdir_p} '%{buildroot}%{_sbindir}'
make install
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%post
%postun
%files
Why is it using /tmp/BUILDROOT literally, instead of /tmp/rpmbuild, and are there other obvious things I'm doing wrong ? I've looked at a lot of other tutorials on rpmbuild, but aren't very clear on best practices or what happens during each phase.
Since the buildroot parm is not passed to rpmbuild, the default path is being used by your spec file:
BuildRoot: %{buildroot}
Try adding the buildroot parm... Add buildroot /tmp/rpmbuild to --define
Or if using a makefile:
BUILD_TMP=/tmp/rpmbuild
TOP_DIR=/tmp
rpmbuild -bb
--buildroot $(BUILD_TMP)
--topdir $(TOP_DIR)
$(SPEC_DIR)/testspec.spec
In my case rpm-build was missing.
So sudo yum install rpm-build solved the problem. Or if you use puppet:
package { 'rpm-build':
ensure => latest,
}
I went through fair amount of google search to install ack-grep on CentOS but I didn't find anything help. I also looked for the source codes but couldn't find it neither. Does anyone know how to install it on the OS?
Thanks a lot.
Could be essentially the same as https://stackoverflow.com/a/23155007/35946 but on CentOS 6.7 the answer is:
# yum install epel-release
# yum install ack
if you don't have the root permission, you can do as follows:
$ curl https://beyondgrep.com/ack-2.22-single-file > ~/bin/ack && chmod 0755 !#:3
or you can change to root user:
$ sudo su
# curl https://beyondgrep.com/ack-2.22-single-file > /bin/ack && chmod 0755 !#:3
You can get it from the EPEL software repository.
From the EPEL FAQ:
For EL5:
su -c 'rpm -Uvh http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/5/i386/epel-release-5-4.noarch.rpm'
...
su -c 'yum install ack'
For EL6:
su -c 'rpm -Uvh http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/i386/epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm'
...
su -c 'yum install ack'
Go to Beyond Grep and look at the section titled
Install The ack executeable
curl http://beyondgrep.com/ack-2.14-single-file > ~/bin/ack && chmod 0755 !#:3
And replace ack.2.14 with the current version of ack.
You may need to create the directory mkdir ~/bin/ first. You may
also need to modify ~/.bashrc to include this new path E.G.:
PATH=$PATH:$HOME/bin
Then reload ~/.bashrc
source ~/.bashrc
Test the installation by running ack:
rpm -qa | ack s
This should display any installed packages containing the letter s. (some linux distributions may use ack-grep as the command.
How did you try installing it? Are you using yum? The package is probably not called "ack-grep", but just "ack".
The name "ack-grep" is a Debian-specific thing because there was already a package called "ack", so they called it "ack-grep" instead. That was years ago and now they're dropping the original "ack" package and renaming "ack-grep" to "ack".
For RedHat Enterprise just do sudo yum install ack
My first post here, but I googled around and cannot find a simple way to do this.
I have a program which automatically configures new CentOS Linux servers as they come online. As part of the process it installs the latest version of epel-release rpm.
The command I use looks like this:
$ rpm -Uvh http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/epel-release-6-7.noarch.rpm && \
yum clean all
This works great... until they change the rpm file to epel-release-6-8.noarch, then epel-release-6-9.noarch, and so on. They seem to update the version every 3-4 months. This is a problem, because if the repository updates the epel-release version number, my scripts will fail because it has no idea what that version should be.
I failed to find a link that might redirect to the latest epel rpm file, so I have no choice but to hard-code the version into my install scripts, and change it when they fail.
Anyone know a simple (non-hard-coded) way to download the latest epel rpm without knowing the version number? I'm hoping for a way that does not involve dong a curl on the repo file list and grep'ing the url, but curious what anyone might suggest?
The following script will do the trick:
cat <<EOM >/etc/yum.repos.d/epel-bootstrap.repo
[epel]
name=Bootstrap EPEL
mirrorlist=http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/mirrorlist?repo=epel-\$releasever&arch=\$basearch
failovermethod=priority
enabled=0
gpgcheck=0
EOM
yum --enablerepo=epel -y install epel-release
rm -f /etc/yum.repos.d/epel-bootstrap.repo
It should work on RHEL/CentOS 5 and 6. I didn't test version 4.
The EPEL project has recently implemented "latest" symlinks for the epel-release package.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-5.noarch.rpm
​https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-6.noarch.rpm
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-7.noarch.rpm
See https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/8#comment:12
Do it right from the shell:
$ EPEL_BASEURL=http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/$(awk '/rhel/ {print $2}' /etc/rpm/macros.dist)/$(uname -p)/
$ rpm -ivh $EPEL_BASEURL$(curl -s $EPEL_BASEURL | grep epel-release | awk -F'<|>' '{print $5}')
Retrieving http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm
warning: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.zRXE1U: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 0608b895: NOKEY
Preparing... ########################################### [100%]
1:epel-release ########################################### [100%]
I've tested this on CentOS 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6 and RHEL 6.5 and 6.6, but the contents of /etc/rpm/macros.dist and the HTML code from http://dl.fedoraproject.org should be consistent on all platforms, so this should work on all platforms.
For posterity's sake, here it is with more detail:
$ EPEL_BASEURL=http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/$(awk '/rhel/ {print $2}' /etc/rpm/macros.dist)/$(uname -p)/
# http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/
$ EPEL_RELEASE_RPM=$(curl -s $EPEL_BASEURL | grep epel-release | awk -F'<|>' '{print $5}')
# epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm
$ EPEL_RELEASE_RPMURL=$EPEL_BASEURL$EPEL_RELEASE_RPM
# http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm
$ rpm -ivh $EPEL_RELEASE_RPMURL
Retrieving http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm
warning: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ep6xy3: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 0608b895: NOKEY
Preparing... ########################################### [100%]
1:epel-release ########################################### [100%]
I'm writing a package installer script in Perl. I need a command (probably OS command) that returns a simple 0 or 1 to the caller script if a Ubuntu/Debian package is installed or not.
I've tried
dpkg -s
It always returns 0.
dpkg -L
almost works but if the user does not
apt-get --purge remove
the packages, some files are left and always returns 0
I don't want to grep text - a simple true or false is what I need.
Any ideas?
#Andy:
aptitude remove unixodbc -y
dpkg-query -W unixodbc; echo $?
unixodbc 2.2.11-21
0
aptitude install unixodbc -y
dpkg-query -W unixodbc; echo $?
unixodbc 2.2.11-21
0
Maybe not ideal, but this works:
dpkg -s "$package" | grep '^Status:' | grep -q ' installed'
Or just
dpkg -s "$package" | grep -q '^Status:.* installed'
I think this does it:
test -n "`aptitude search '?name(^packagename$)~i'`"
Won't work on virtual packages.
If you're going to use the dpkg database, I concur with the "use grep" suggestions. Weighing the possibility that the output format of the package tools changes against the complexity of the alternative solutions, it's probably better to use grep.
That said, here are some possibilities:
use dpkg --get-selections. The exit status is always zero, but the output is very simple: <package><white space><status>. This is the "requested state" (install/hold/deinstall/purge), which can differ from the actual package state, but usually won't.
use one of the utilities in the dctrl-tools or dpkg-awk packages
implement a test that directly determines whether the dependency is present, e.g., use pkg-config, or search for a program in PATH. This has the advantage that it will allow the install to continue on systems where the dependency has been built by hand and installed without the knowledge of the package manager. This also makes your install script more portable.
you may want to look in to PackageKit