similar to: Is lsb 3.2+ detrimental to CentOS 5.4?

Hi all, Would anyone know if CentOS 4 and 5 is LSB certified? I have not found any info on RH being LSB certified either. Is RH also LSB certified? In case you need to know, I am compiling a list of LSB certified Linux just for comparison as to who would want to be LSB certified. Just to see if it matters to ppl if it matters to be certified. --- Join OSCC MAMPU Mailing Lists

Hey All, Could someone provide a URL to a page that states what LSB level RHEL/CentOS 6.4 is certified to. I'm looking to download a driver: http://www.openprinting.org/printer/Epson/Epson-WorkForce_1100 They offer a driver for LSB 3.1 or LSB 3.2. I'm hoping that one of those applies to CentOS 6.4. -- _ ?v? /(_)\ ^ ^ Mark LaPierre Registered Linux user No #267004

I've noticed that some systems don't have redhat-lsb or even redhat-lsb-core installed and as a side effect, the ocsinventory agent reports them as 'linux' instead of Centos with the release version. Also, where it is installed and ocsinventory does pick up the name, it doesn't include Centos (pre-7.x) in the 'all Linux' grouping because the name is just CentOS and

I just realized that if you don''t have redhat-lsb on your (Fedora 7) box, all those lsb* facts don''t show up. Should I make redhat-lsb a requirement for the facter rpm to guard against that ? David

Hi, it seems that Facter 1.6.9 complains that "No LSB modules are available." on every run. This is on Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04, probably others as well. This message (on stderr) usually comes from calling "lsb_release -v" when no additional LSB modules are installed. Facter apparently calls "lsb_release -v -s" in facter/lsbrelease.rb. This is neither fatal nor

Hi all, I have a Cent OS 5 box with a fairly full install which I'm trying to strip down. Since this machine will be running headless I would like to remove all of the X11 stuff which is installed on it. However, it seems that the "redhat-lsb" package, which I would like to keep, is dependent on X11 - redhat-lsb depends on /usr/bin/lpr - /usr/bin/lpr is provided by cups -

when i checked the SPEC file for redhat-lsb i did a search for postfix and it didnt find anything...how can there be a postfix dep if its not mentioned in the SPEC file for redhat-lsb?

Is it possible to eliminate the postfix dep that is required to update to the latest redhat-lsb rpm when upgrading to 3.4 can i just download the source and remove the postfix dep and rebuild, and update the redhat-lsb rpm on my system. i dont think that the post fix dep was there when i updated to 3.3 from 3.1

Hi All, In the example42 modules, I noticed the following is done: # Calculate OS version (without using lsb facts) $ossplit=split($operatingsystemrelease, ''[.]'') $osver=$ossplit[0] I''ve been using $lsbmajdistrelease in all my configs. Is there any particular reason why I might want to use the above instead? (apart from the dependency on redhat-lsb, which is

Ok so your saying to just remove the redhat-lsb rpm. But, am I suppose to have that rpm for some reason...i can eliminate more packages from my system if i do remove the redhat-lsb rpm. I just though it was a required back that shouldnt be removed from the system...

I have 2 RHEL 5.4 systems where all facter lsb* items are missing. Any ideas? Sanitized facter output: architecture => i386 domain => missyou.edu facterversion => 1.5.7 fqdn => broken.missyou.edu hardwareisa => i686 hardwaremodel => i686 hostname => broken id => root interfaces => eth0,sit0 ipaddress => 1.2.1.5 ipaddress_eth0 => 1.2.1.5 is_virtual => true

From: Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org> > There is nothing wrong with using X11 at runlevel 3. The only thing > that can't be present is a display manager (KDM, XDM, GDM etc). That's _exactly_ what I'm talking about. Run-level 3 starts xdm. Several Linux distros use 2 for multi-user, 3 for multi-user w/X. Run-level 2 as multi-user w/o networking or w/o NFS was

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 3.0+hg11292-2 Tags: patch User: initscripts-ng-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: incorrect-dependency When testing dependency based boot sequencing, I discovered a bug in the init.d script for xen-utils-common. It is set to stop in the boot "runlevel" (S), but no script should stop there. Also, xend only depend on $local_fs, but

Hello all, any updates on the progress of compiling WINE against the LSB? I know Dan was attempting to here http://www.mail-archive.com/wine-devel at winehq.org/msg47916.html but there's been no recent updates. Or, does anyone have any tips or tutorials or best practices to deploy a self contained WINE installation, e.g. Picasa style? Thanks, j

Hi, I'd like to load with pxelinux an RTEMS executable file, the format is ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, strtipped Can someone tell me if there is a way to load it with PXElinux. When I try to do it, the error message is : invalid or corrupt kernel image Thanks for your help. Regards. Stephane ARQUER

> So, clearly the optimization is making things worse. Would it be okay to delete > this code and eliminate the isBaseAddressKnownZero? I would like to get rid of > it. I think it is OK. I can see ld/gdb expecting a relocation, but if that is the case we should just have a flag saying it is needed. If you are really motivated to check it, run the gdb testsuite with your patch, but on

----- Original Message ---- > From: Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thu, March 10, 2011 4:22:32 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Detrimental optimization for reducing relocations. > > > So, clearly the optimization is making things worse. Would it be okay to >delete > > this code and eliminate the

> Will the testsuite work on ELF? The patch does not make any functional change > for the other formats. I know that gdb is okay with the example, but that > doesn't say very much. The patch is probably OK then. The gdb testsuite works with clang on ELF. There used to be a lot of silly failures like it not expecting clang warnings, but I think most of the current ones are real.

> From: Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thu, March 10, 2011 4:22:32 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Detrimental optimization for reducing relocations. > > > So, clearly the optimization is making things worse. Would it be okay to >delete > > this code and eliminate the isBaseAddressKnownZero? I would

Hi all, I am creating a recipe for rhel boxes which needs to determine what type of install is present (server or client). I thought I would use the facter fact lsbdistid for this purpose but when I run "facter lsbdistid" from the command line nothing is returned. If I just run facter and grep for lsbdistid, what I am looking for is returned. Does anyone know why this might be?