rpm-yum-bootstrap-1_3.wpi and UNIXROOT

[Al Savage]

I am attempting to install rpm-yum-bootstrap-1_3.wpi on an eCS 2.1 box.
I have a problem during the WarpIn installation due to the UNIXROOT

Samba (Samba\samba-1-1-2.wpi) sets UNIXROOT to <bootdrive>\MPTN :
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UnixRoot=WirexxGetEnv('UNIXROOT')
if UnixRoot = "" then do
UnixRoot = SysBootDrive()||'\MPTN'
rc=WirexxPutEnv("UNIXROOT",UnixRoot)
[ . . . ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

However, rpm-yum-bootstrap insists taht UNIXROOT be elsewhere :
---------------------------------------------------------------------
if (unixroot \== '') then do
unixdrv = filespec('D', unixroot)
if (filespec('P', unixroot) \== '' | filespec('N', unixroot) \== '')
then do
call WirexxShowMessage ,
'YUM: Warning',,
'YUM utilizes the Unix-like directory structure pointed to by
the UNIXROOT environment variable. In the current implementation, this
directory structure must be located in the root directory of the hard
drive but your current UNIXROOT setting is
"'unixroot'".'||'0D0A'x||'0D0A'x,
'In order to install YUM, you will need to do the
following:'||'0D0A'x||'0D0A'x,
'1. Cancel the installation by pressing OK below.'||'0D0A'x,
'2. Move the contents of the directory "'unixroot'" to the root
directory of drive 'unixdrv||'0D0A'x,
'3. Set UNIXROOT='unixdrv' in CONFIG.SYS.'||'0D0A'x,
'4. Reboot.'||'0D0A'x,
'5. Start the YUM installation again.'||'0D0A'x||'0D0A'x,
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think I want to be moving everything in \MPTN to \

I'm hoping someone who's installed both Samba and rpm-yum can provide
some guidance.

[Dave Yeo]

Post by Al Savage
I am attempting to install rpm-yum-bootstrap-1_3.wpi on an eCS 2.1 box.
I have a problem during the WarpIn installation due to the UNIXROOT

Yes, they screwed up by recycling an EMX environment variable. I have
different conflicts on Warp v4 so when I installed RPM I didn't let it
touch config.sys, instead having a small script to set PATH, LIBPATH and
the Python stuff up. The long time problem is that more and more stuff
will use RPM.
Dave

[Al Savage]

Post by Dave Yeo
when I installed RPM I didn't let it
touch config.sys, instead having a small script to set PATH, LIBPATH and
the Python stuff up.

As I've installed Samba but haven't actually used it (haven't removed
TCPIP over NetBIOS yet), I was leaning toward fixing up the Samba
environment to use x:\ as opposed to wrapping the rpm (& yum?) startup
with a redirect.

I'm really not at all conversant with either (rpm & yum, and Samba), so
it's difficult to gauge which way I should go.

[Dave Yeo]

Post by Al Savage

Post by Dave Yeo
when I installed RPM I didn't let it
touch config.sys, instead having a small script to set PATH, LIBPATH and
the Python stuff up.

As I've installed Samba but haven't actually used it (haven't removed
TCPIP over NetBIOS yet), I was leaning toward fixing up the Samba
environment to use x:\ as opposed to wrapping the rpm (& yum?) startup
with a redirect.
I'm really not at all conversant with either (rpm& yum, and Samba), so
it's difficult to gauge which way I should go.

Well there are plans to keep extending rpm/yum and it is the recommended
method for installing Java, QT, Odin and various *nix utilities
including being used for such in eCS 2.2 you should probably move Samba
Dave

[Doug Bissett]

Post by Dave Yeo

Post by Al Savage

Post by Dave Yeo
when I installed RPM I didn't let it
touch config.sys, instead having a small script to set PATH, LIBPATH and
the Python stuff up.

As I've installed Samba but haven't actually used it (haven't removed
TCPIP over NetBIOS yet), I was leaning toward fixing up the Samba
environment to use x:\ as opposed to wrapping the rpm (& yum?) startup
with a redirect.
I'm really not at all conversant with either (rpm& yum, and Samba), so
it's difficult to gauge which way I should go.

Well there are plans to keep extending rpm/yum and it is the recommended
method for installing Java, QT, Odin and various *nix utilities
including being used for such in eCS 2.2 you should probably move Samba
Dave

SAMBA works okay, with UNIXROOT=c:\MPTN\ETC but that is screwed when
you install RPM/YUM, and you certainly do NOT want RPM/YUM messing in
c:\MPTS\ETC. I did install RPM/YUM on an old test machine. I did it
when I installed eCS 2.1, and it didn't cause too many problems when I
did that, although I highly recomment installing it on a large drive,
that is not the boot drive. That basically means that you will need to
have the target drive formatted before the actual install begins (not
hard to do with the eCS installer). If you are trying to add RPM/YUM
to an established system, I pretty well guarantee that you will break
something.

BTW, you can play with the SAMBA client, when you are using NETBIOS
over TCP/IP. It will coexist. It is the server part that can't coexist
with NETBIOS (over TCP/IP), because it uses the same network ports.

[Al Savage]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:13:24 UTC, "Doug Bissett"

Post by Doug Bissett
SAMBA works okay, with UNIXROOT=c:\MPTN\ETC but that is screwed when
you install RPM/YUM,

Yeah, I noticed :/

Post by Doug Bissett
I did install RPM/YUM on an old test machine. I did it
when I installed eCS 2.1, and it didn't cause too many problems when I
did that, although I highly recomment installing it on a large drive,
that is not the boot drive.

Yeah, that's gonna bite me, I'm afraid. Only 300Mb free on the boot
drive. I didn't plan far enough ahead when I did the eCS 2.1 install.
Maybe there's a JFS partition resizing tool?

Post by Doug Bissett
If you are trying to add RPM/YUM
to an established system, I pretty well guarantee that you will break
something.

Sigh.

Post by Doug Bissett
BTW, you can play with the SAMBA client, when you are using NETBIOS
over TCP/IP. It will coexist. It is the server part that can't coexist
with NETBIOS (over TCP/IP), because it uses the same network ports.

It's the Samba server I have installed. This eCS box is destined to
replace a 10-year-old WSA box that gives me NO trouble and only has to
be rebooted twice a year at most. Mostly, I need to leave HPFS386 (and
64Gb partitions) behind.

I found a buglet in the rpm/yum installer (and it's now Ticket #58)
where with UNIXROOT set to "C:\", the WarpIn install script doesn't
strip the trailing '\' before comparing it with
unixdrv = filespec('D', unixroot)
which returns the drive letter + colon ("C:")

So, although I had
SET UNIXROOT=C:\
it's comparted against "C:", and the install failed.

Just for fun, I've SUBSTP'd Q: for C:\Unix_Tree, and SET UNIXROOT=Q:,
and the rpm/yum bootstrap install script likes that fine.

http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/util/disk/subst120.zip

Now I get to go investigate this, at the end of "yum install yum":

Failed:
ash.i386 0:0.0.0-10.oc00 ca-certificates.noarch
0:2011.80-1.oc00
coreutils.i386 0:8.6-7.oc00 file-libs.i386 0:5.04-6.oc00
ncurses.i386 0:5.7-4.oc00 openssl.i386 0:1.0.0a-5.oc00
rpm.i386 0:4.8.1-14.oc00 tcl.i386 1:8.5.9-2.oc00

Oh, goody. I wish there was an actual support forum for this thing.

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Doug Bissett

Post by Dave Yeo

Post by Al Savage

Post by Dave Yeo
when I installed RPM I didn't let it
touch config.sys, instead having a small script to set PATH, LIBPATH and
the Python stuff up.

As I've installed Samba but haven't actually used it (haven't removed
TCPIP over NetBIOS yet), I was leaning toward fixing up the Samba
environment to use x:\ as opposed to wrapping the rpm (& yum?) startup
with a redirect.
I'm really not at all conversant with either (rpm& yum, and Samba), so
it's difficult to gauge which way I should go.

Well there are plans to keep extending rpm/yum and it is the recommended
method for installing Java, QT, Odin and various *nix utilities
including being used for such in eCS 2.2 you should probably move Samba
Dave

SAMBA works okay, with UNIXROOT=c:\MPTN\ETC but that is screwed when
you install RPM/YUM, and you certainly do NOT want RPM/YUM messing in
c:\MPTS\ETC. I did install RPM/YUM on an old test machine. I did it
when I installed eCS 2.1, and it didn't cause too many problems when I
did that, although I highly recomment installing it on a large drive,
that is not the boot drive. That basically means that you will need to
have the target drive formatted before the actual install begins (not
hard to do with the eCS installer). If you are trying to add RPM/YUM
to an established system, I pretty well guarantee that you will break
something.
BTW, you can play with the SAMBA client, when you are using NETBIOS
over TCP/IP. It will coexist. It is the server part that can't coexist
with NETBIOS (over TCP/IP), because it uses the same network ports.

You people STILL can't get your terminology right. How MANY TIMES do
you need to be told?
It is PEER that is the equivalent to SAMBA.
Netbios over TCP/IP is just another network protocol layer usable by
anything that is capable.

[Al Savage]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:03:24 UTC, Paul Ratcliffe

Post by Paul Ratcliffe

Post by Doug Bissett

Post by Al Savage
As I've installed Samba but haven't actually used it (haven't removed
TCPIP over NetBIOS yet), I was leaning toward fixing up the Samba
environment to use x:\ as opposed to wrapping the rpm (& yum?) startup
with a redirect.

BTW, you can play with the SAMBA client, when you are using NETBIOS
over TCP/IP. It will coexist. It is the server part that can't coexist
with NETBIOS (over TCP/IP), because it uses the same network ports.

You people STILL can't get your terminology right. How MANY TIMES do
you need to be told?

I guess we just need to be told properly. By you, it seems.

Post by Paul Ratcliffe
It is PEER that is the equivalent to SAMBA.
Netbios over TCP/IP is just another network protocol layer usable by
anything that is capable.

Who said otherwise? Why get all UPPERCASE?

http://svn.netlabs.org/samba/wiki/Cookbook
"install TCPBEUI (NETBIOS over TCPI/IP) using MPTS. Samba works directly
with TCP/IP and occupies the same port number as TCPBEUI, therefore you
cannot use TCPBEUI and Samba together."

Occupies the same port, they say. Can't be used together, they say.
I'm not an expert. I'm taking their word for that.

But nobody's said that Samba isn't a Peer replacement product, or
confusing Application/Presentation layers with Session/Transport layers.

In your terms, what are you on about?

BTW, you don't need to quote an entire page to comment on two sentences.
You've been around long enough to know your Usenetiquette.. Best get
on that.

Now that I reflect, you are one of three people here that prompted me to
ignore this NG for years. You're just so damned testy. If you weren't
a valuable contributor, I'd filter you out, like Timmy. Haven't you
heard comments like this before? Do you think we're all wrong?

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Al Savage
http://svn.netlabs.org/samba/wiki/Cookbook
"install TCPBEUI (NETBIOS over TCPI/IP) using MPTS. Samba works directly
with TCP/IP and occupies the same port number as TCPBEUI, therefore you
cannot use TCPBEUI and Samba together."
Occupies the same port, they say. Can't be used together, they say.

Who says and why would you believe them?
Whoever wrote that was just as ignorant as everyone else who gets it
wrong. TCPBEUI doesn't occupy ANY port numbers until you run an application
that binds to one. Peer and Samba use the same one, which is why they
can't coexist.

Post by Al Savage
I'm not an expert. I'm taking their word for that.

Yet you feel the need to argue from a point of little knowledge?

Post by Al Savage
If you weren't a valuable contributor, I'd filter you out, like Timmy.

Don't be ridiculous. Timmy just talked drivel. Thankfully he's long dead.
Now we've got Bissett, although not quite in the same league.