CentOS yum giving me grief

[Red Squirrel]

Is it just me, or does yum in CEntOS suck? It seems to either never find an obvious package (like ntpserver) or it finds it but just errors out.

I want to install VNC on one of my dev servers so I can VNC to it and have all my windows opened/setup like I want, and leave that session at any time and go back to it, rather then have all that stuff opened up on my workstation. I successfully installed VNC, but I did not originally intend to do that, so I never installed a GUI, so my VNC is well, GUI less. So I decided to do:

yum install "X window system"

It went through everything, then right at the end craps out. So I figured ok, maybe I'll try "gnome desktop environment". Same thing... this is the error I get:

...snip...
(100/108): poppler-0.5.4- 100% |=========================| 3.0 MB    00:06
(101/108): cdrecord-2.01- 100% |=========================| 586 kB    00:02
(102/108): cdparanoia-lib 100% |=========================|  50 kB    00:00
(103/108): desktop-printi 100% |=========================| 103 kB    00:00
(104/108): gtkhtml3-3.16. 100% |=========================| 935 kB    00:02
(105/108): gnome-python2- 100% |=========================|  53 kB    00:00
(106/108): eel2-2.16.1-1. 100% |=========================| 368 kB    00:01
(107/108): nautilus-2.16. 100% |=========================| 4.2 MB    00:09
(108/108): gnome-screensa 100% |=========================| 1.8 MB    00:05
Running rpm_check_debug
Running Transaction Test
Finished Transaction Test


Transaction Check Error:
  file /usr/share/man/man1/Xserver.1x.gz from install of xorg-x11-server-Xnest-1.1.1-48.67.el5 conflicts with file from package xorg-x11-server-Xvfb-1.1.1-48.41.el5

Error Summary
-------------

[root@cpdev .vnc]# X
-bash: X: command not found
[root@cpdev .vnc]#

 

[Gamingphreek]

Personally, I have always found the 'yum' manager to be kind of clunky and slow (at least compared to aptitude).

I'm not sure how to fix the error, but it seems trivial as it looks to be conflicting copies of man(1) manpage for the xserver.

Additionally, isn't the command 'start x' not just 'x'?

-Kevin

 

[Red Squirrel]

Tried X just to see if it was installed, as I figured maybe it was already installed and that my vnc just had issues. Typing X in the ssh console will usually result in a display error (as ssh can't display video obviously) but it tells me that it's installed. Suppose service would have done the same thing too.

Is there a way I can just install X manually? Heck, if I just put in the DVD, is it possible to install from there? Normally with a GUI I could then go to package manager and do it that way, but not sure if it's possible through the command line.

I'm running a full yum update now in hopes it might fix the problem. I also tried rebooting already.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Managed to get it working. I ran a yum update and it updated the whole system,then I tried to install both the X and gnome packages and they both went through.

 

[Nothinman]

Is it just me, or does yum in CEntOS suck?

Yum has it's problems, performance being at the top of my list. But neither of these were yum's fault. The package containing ntpd is just called ntp, not ntpserver and in this case you had 2 packages shipping the same man page. In this particular case it's likely because they're different versions (1.1.1-48.67.el5 vs 1.1.1-48.41.el5) so it's likely you did an update after the Xnest package was uploaded but before the Xvfb one.

And regardless of the package manager, unless you're sticking to using the packages on the initial install discs you should always do an update before attempting to install anything.

 

[Red Squirrel]

well for ntp I tried everything. I tried ntpserver ntpd ntp-server ntps and every other combination I could think of, no go. And why would a man page cause an entire program to not install? It should just overwrite it! Not like a man page is what makes a program work. In windows if you were to reinstall office, it's not going to crap out with obscure errors just because a readme.txt file is left behind. I'd figure that yum would at least have the competancy of microsoft installer.

 

[Nothinman]

well for ntp I tried everything. I tried ntpserver ntpd ntp-server ntps and every other combination I could think of, no go.

But not 'yum search ntp'?

And why would a man page cause an entire program to not install? It should just overwrite it!

No, it shouldn't overwrite it. Just imagine how pissed you'd be if it did install and then the man page you were looking at when setting it up was documenting another binary. There are rpm switches to force overwriting of files but I'm not sure if you can pass them in via yum or not.

In windows if you were to reinstall office, it's not going to crap out with obscure errors just because a readme.txt file is left behind.

The rpm process failed because the file was owned by another package, if the file was there and unowned by a package I think it would've overwrote it, not 100% sure though.

And your faith in Windows installers is severly misplaced. It took me at least 3 tries to get a SQL 2005 security patch to install yesterday and the errors in the logs were much more vague. And on top of that the KB article I found documenting the 1603 error given by the Windows installer was just full of "Maybe try this" things about permissions and NTFS encryption. Luckily I found some random guy's blog saying to change 1 registry entry for the install and that worked.

I'd figure that yum would at least have the competancy of microsoft installer.

Thank god it doesn't. I'd much rather have it say "I failed the transaction because of X" instead of "Sorry, install failed and no I'm not telling you why.".

 

[n0cmonkey]

well for ntp I tried everything. I tried ntpserver ntpd ntp-server ntps and every other combination I could think of, no go.[/q]

Search, its easy. I think some of the package names suck, but searching still helps me find them (instead of trying every possible name I can think of).

[q]And why would a man page cause an entire program to not install? It should just overwrite it! Not like a man page is what makes a program work.[/q]

NO, that's wrong, destructive, unintuitive, and stupid. That specific version of the file is registered to a program in the RPM database. If a new package overwrites a file owned by another package there will be inconsistencies in the database that can cause any number of issues (for the user or for the programs). What happens when you go to uninstall the first package? It removes the file needed by the second package, or it complains that the file is not correct and bombs. What happens if you run an rpm integrity check? The first package sees that the file has changed and complains, possibly leading to many lost man hours investigating the potential incident.

[q]In windows if you were to reinstall office, it's not going to crap out with obscure errors just because a readme.txt file is left behind. I'd figure that yum would at least have the competancy of microsoft installer.

Windows uses a simpler, less integrated system. If you want something closer to how Windows does things, compile everything from source yourself. That _might_ do it.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Windows uses a simpler, less integrated system. If you want something closer to how Windows does things, compile everything from source yourself. That _might_ do it.

Actually in most cases those type of packages fail. It's usually like a 80% chance of fail. If it does not fail on ./configure, it will probably fail on make or make install. Every now and then one of those packages might work. To me they should just pick a standard like RPM or something, and stick to it, and just perfection it. Yum is ok, but you have to depend on the distro having that package in the repository, and have to rely on an internet connection.

 

[Nothinman]

Actually in most cases those type of packages fail. It's usually like a 80% chance of fail. If it does not fail on ./configure, it will probably fail on make or make install. Every now and then one of those packages might work. To me they should just pick a standard like RPM or something, and stick to it, and just perfection it. Yum is ok, but you have to depend on the distro having that package in the repository, and have to rely on an internet connection.

If a compilation fails it's because you don't have the right headers installed, most of the time the INSTALL or README file tells you what you need. I haven't compiled anything manually in a long time but it wasn't that difficult when I did.

Yum isn't a package manager, it's a layer on top of rpm. I believe that rpm is the standard package defined by the LSB. But the package manager is largely irrelevant, rpm and deb have minor differences but either works just as well.

Yum can install packages from repositories on places other than an FTP/HTTP site and it can install local rpms via 'yum localinstall blah.rpm'.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Actually in most cases those type of packages fail. It's usually like a 80% chance of fail. If it does not fail on ./configure, it will probably fail on make or make install. Every now and then one of those packages might work. To me they should just pick a standard like RPM or something, and stick to it, and just perfection it. Yum is ok, but you have to depend on the distro having that package in the repository, and have to rely on an internet connection.

Then you're doing it wrong. Probably missing a dependency. You have to depend on a package (rpm, or deb, or whatever) no matter what system you're using. You're either at the mercy of the package people, or you spend time to create the package. Man up or shut up.