can't update mozilla with up2date

[M.Hockings]

Ken Chamberlain wrote:

>On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 09:35, M.Hockins wrote:
>  
>
>>From: "M.Hockings" <veeshooter at hockings.net>
>>Subject: Re: can't update mozilla with up2date
>>Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:35:13 -0500
>>Reply-To: fedora-list at redhat.com
>>
>>Ken Chamberlain wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 14:32, Ben Stringer wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>Galeon is a light-weight Gnome browser based on mozilla's rendering
>>>>>engine. You would be safe to remove it. Galeon was replaced by
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>Epiphany
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>in Fedora Core 1.
>>>>>
>>>>>See the FC1 release notes for details -
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>/usr/share/doc/fedora-release-1
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>Cheers, Ben
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>OK, thanks all.  I'll se what the release notes have to say on this
>>>>        
>>>>
>>and
>>    
>>
>>>>give removing Galeon a whirl as I don't use it.
>>>>I guess I have it installed because my FC1 install is really an
>>>>        
>>>>
>>upgrade
>>    
>>
>>>>install from RH9 which I presume had Galeon.  Can I expect to see more
>>>>hitches like this due to the upgrade rather than clean install?
>>>>
>>>>Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes... "up2date --show-orphans" should show you any upgrade leftovers
>>>(as well as non-FC1 extras).
>>>
>>>Ken Chamberlain
>>>University of Toronto 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Thanks all,
>>
>>The rpm -e for galeon then allowed up2date to pull down all the updates 
>>just fine.
>>
>>I then ran the show-orphans and it lists a whole bunch of packages. 
>>Other than a couple of things that I've installed later (wine and j2kre 
>>1.4) are all these things just taking up disk space?  If I remove them 
>>as well (rpm -e) will it cause me any problems?  That is, my FC1 install
>>is an upgrade from RH9, so I am presuming that these "extra" things are 
>>left-overs from RH9 that are no longer required for FC1 and could be 
>>removed.  The list of packages follows for those interested...
>>
>>    
>>
>[snip]
>FC1 ISO image 1 contains the RELEASE-NOTES file which tells us what has
>been removed from FC1 since RHL 9, so if you (or I) had done a clean
>install we wouldn't need/have these packages.  With that reasoning I
>assumed it was safe to remove ("rpm -e" or "yum remove", your pick) if
>FC1 release notes said it hat been removed.  I also had a long list of
>orphans, not all of which I knew where they come from.  What I did was I
>mounted the FC1 ISO1 (rpms not SRPMS!) and cd'd to the dir with the
>release notes, then ran something like:
>
>for pkg in `up2date --show-orphans | cut -d'-' -f1`
>do
>grep $pkg RELEASE-NOTES
>done
>
>If the grepped lines say the rpm was removed/replaced, I removed it. 
>Note that the cut above is not perfect.  It cuts soup-devel-... as
>"soup" and the RELEASE-NOTES say soup has been replaced by libsoup.  No
>mention of "soup-devel".
>
>You didn't mention your upgrade history.  I upgraded from RHL 8 through
>RHL 9 and now to FC1.  Presumably I should have done a like procedure
>after upgrading to RHL 9, (but I didn't) so I presume I have garbage
>rpms left over from RHL 8.  You may be able to find older RELEASE-NOTES
>on redhat's web site...
> 
>  
>
Thanks Ken,

I'll have a look a this tonight if I get a moment.  However, my eldest 
son gave me a new game (ut2003) for my birthday and I must admit that 
playing that is more interesting than making sure the machine is clean ;-) 

BTW, just for interest, I have the game running under Linux as it won't 
install on Windows (Win98, same machine, dual boot).

Mike