search for: repackagings

The price we pay.. :) BTW, Mozilla publishes tarballs that you can simply extract and run (and will self-update), you can use those (it's what I am doing as a workaround in fact until RH catches up): https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/60.6.3esr/linux-x86_64/ -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "CentOS

Hy, I had a mistake on a function of a package i have created! I have solved it and then i repackaged and installed the modified package. I use to launch R from Excel! And so when i launch R, and next call my function from the workspace, i still find the problem on my function. And when i read on my workspace, the source code of my function, i find the old version of my function (the one from the

Hi, Is there any way to list availabe RPM rollback's and timestamps in CentOS 4? It's possible to get RPM rollbacks with up2date, but appears that's deprecated ;-( # up2date --list-rollbacks This feature is deprecated and no longer functional I want a method to list current available rollback and the timestamp: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7034 How do you deal with this

I've read the DB for Adobe Photoshop CS5, and a member mentioned using Kace Repackager to create a installable MSI package. I cant find much docs or guides to using the program and Im having trouble using it. I would select Setup.exe for the Photoshop or Dreamweaver installation, allow it to pre and post scan the changes and the result is a unexpected small .msi file. How do you use this msi

> The price we pay.. :) Do you say that paying RH customers already received new firefox packages? Regards, Simon > > BTW, Mozilla publishes tarballs that you can simply extract and run (and > will self-update), you can use those (it's what I am doing as a workaround > in fact until RH catches up): > https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/60.6.3esr/linux-x86_64/ >

> I was told lately about this workaround, check it out. > https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/04/update-regarding-add-ons-in-firefox/ The signing thing is a security feature. I don't like a workaround to disable a security feature instead of fixing it. What makes me feel a bit bad is that everybody has fixed versions by now, only we enterprise Linux users using the ESR version

I was told lately about this workaround, check it out. https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/04/update-regarding-add-ons-in-firefox/ -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Sent:

Hi Nux, The number will be higher than that. Some large systems just download once to their own private mirror and install from there. Where I used to work each download went to at least 6 systems, probably more. Regards, Martin On 10/05/2019 10:12, Nux! wrote: > I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user

Hy, I had a mistake on a function of a package i have created! I have solved it and then i repackaged and installed the modified package. I use to launch R from Excel! And so when i launch R, and next call my function from the workspace, i still find the problem on my function. And when i read on my workspace, the source code of my function, i find the old version of my function (the one from the

I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user agent downloading stuff from it. It's a bit anecdotal as perhaps not all are actual desktop users and some users were using multiple IPs (dhcp), but it shows there are quite a few users out there running CentOS for desktop purposes. There are desktop focused distros

firefox_repackage via CentOS wrote: > Hi everyone, I use firefox on centos 7 at work but due to the fairly well > know extension signing problem, I cannot use ublock origin. > > From what I can tell, the latest version of firefox in the updates > repository is 60.6.1-1.el7. It looks like Mozilla have just released > firefox esr 60.6.2 which should fix the signing issue. (see >

cool!! that works for now.. thanks Mark!! On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 11:21 AM mark <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > firefox_repackage via CentOS wrote: > > Hi everyone, I use firefox on centos 7 at work but due to the fairly well > > know extension signing problem, I cannot use ublock origin. > > > > From what I can tell, the latest version of firefox in the updates

On 09/05/2019 09:09, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >> The price we pay.. :) > > Do you say that paying RH customers already received new firefox packages? > > Regards, > Simon > No, Red Hat have not yet released any updates for Firefox. I doubt it's a priority for them.

Hello Nux!, On Fri, 10 May 2019 10:12:59 +0100 (BST) Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro> wrote: > I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user agent downloading stuff from it. > > It's a bit anecdotal as perhaps not all are actual desktop users and some users were using multiple IPs (dhcp), but it shows

> Am 10.05.2019 um 11:12 schrieb Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro>: >> >> I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year >> or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user agent downloading >> stuff from it. >> >> It's a bit anecdotal as perhaps not all are actual desktop users and >> some users were using multiple IPs

I have re-packaged xulrunner 1.9.2.26 for CentOS 5 for use with older applications which can't be run with xulrunner 10.0.4. I created 'compatibity' RPMs that can be safely installed alongside xulrunner 10.0.4. I needed it to run the Evergreen 2.1 and 2.2 Staff Clients at our local library. The RPMs are available in the Deepwoods Software repo at the URL:

Hi everyone, I use firefox on centos 7 at work but due to the fairly well know extension signing problem, I cannot use ublock origin. From what I can tell, the latest version of firefox in the updates repository is 60.6.1-1.el7. It looks like Mozilla have just released firefox esr 60.6.2 which should fix the signing issue. (see https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/60.6.2/releasenotes/) Would it

> On 09/05/2019 09:09, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >>> The price we pay.. :) >> >> Do you say that paying RH customers already received new firefox >> packages? >> >> Regards, >> Simon >> > > No, Red Hat have not yet released any updates for Firefox. I doubt it's > a priority for them. Which makes me believe they don't

On 11/05/19 2:05 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >> Am 10.05.2019 um 11:12 schrieb Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro>: >>> I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year >>> or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user agent downloading >>> stuff from it. >>> >>> It's a bit anecdotal as perhaps not all are actual

Am 10.05.2019 um 11:12 schrieb Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro>: > > I maintain a desktop oriented repo for CentOS and last I checked a year or so ago, I got over 150k+ unique IPs with yum user agent downloading stuff from it. > > It's a bit anecdotal as perhaps not all are actual desktop users and some users were using multiple IPs (dhcp), but it shows there are quite a few users