similar to: CEBA-2013:0448 CentOS 6 redhat-lsb Update

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2014:1270 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1270.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 6637f912283e727dbb61803200b26ad1974e4ed1c254d8cb315d79be3cb052f6 redhat-lsb-4.1-27.el7.i686.rpm

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

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

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...

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

I found out today that Google Chrome is now available for Linux. However, and this is a big but: $ sudo rpm -ivh google-chrome-beta_current_x86_64.rpm Password: warning: google-chrome-beta_current_x86_64.rpm: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 7fac5991 error: Failed dependencies: lsb >= 3.2 is needed by google-chrome-beta-4.0.249.30-33928.x86_64 xdg-utils is needed by

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

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

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 -

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

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

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

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

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

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2012:0448 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0448.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: 37ba95cfcdc57bf33b855060b56f8dbd5eb4814916d3941d7ec12cfdbc7348c7 system-config-printer-1.1.16-23.el6.i686.rpm

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2014:0448 Critical Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2014-0448.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: f604914eab407ecede9dc432862d683e447ead9d1ca6233bba6ccea1fae2fb8c firefox-24.5.0-1.el6.centos.i686.rpm x86_64:

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2014:0448 Critical Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2014-0448.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: cd7fb2914457b55281d212820970dd3a24431f4771b4173bd12d2b08e2183cb2 firefox-24.5.0-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm x86_64:

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0448 Moderate Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0448.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: b5decc0e8074aa9e596c96b3323adab98335d5cd675cb9b51ccee1dd26353bed libsmbclient-3.6.23-25.el6_7.i686.rpm