Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: When is a package not a package?

  1. #1
    Junior Member Goldhedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default When is a package not a package?

    I've been exploring the Slax website and found out about pgktool, yet when I try to uninstall a program (package) found in pkgtools (e.g. mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.10-), I select the item and hit "return" key... the display reads "NO PACKAGES REMOVED".

    In BT3 my goal is to upgrade some programs (like Firefox and Java and some other apps) but in order to save disk space, I'm looking to remove some of the original installs on BT3 (I do not wish to install BT4 on my system).

    Also, is a .tgz file proprietary to Slax? Hence being the only ones which can be installed using # installpkg command?

    I am familiar with # removepkg to remove applications like Firefox, would that be the best route to take to remove apps like Firefox, Cowpatty, Kismet so I can install updated versions?

    Another question I have is what is the appropriate folder to install new apps into Backtrack? I'm the only one who will be using this system, should they go into /root or usr/ or usr/lib?


    Please pardon the any improper use of terminology and randomness of my post.

  2. #2
    Good friend of the forums
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    356

    Default

    update to bt4 and forget about your problems?

  3. #3
    Super Moderator lupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xorred View Post
    update to bt4 and forget about your problems?
    Its a good suggestion. One of the many things that has been improved in BT4 is the package management. Is there some reason you don't want to use BT4 Goldhedge?
    Capitalisation is important. It's the difference between "Helping your brother Jack off a horse" and "Helping your brother jack off a horse".

    The Forum Rules, Forum FAQ and the BackTrack Wiki... learn them, love them, live them.

  4. #4
    Very good friend of the forum Gitsnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Crystal Wind
    Posts
    851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lupin View Post
    Its a good suggestion. One of the many things that has been improved in BT4 is the package management. Is there some reason you don't want to use BT4 Goldhedge?
    I don't know about Goldhedge, but one of my systems (an EeePC) is only a 4GB model and I would prefer to do what I currently do and write to the 4GB SD Card for all my volatile data, and boot off the main drive for the OS.

    There is also the "BT is not yet in 'final' and I don't want to use a beta/release-candidate".

    (Yes I could get a 20GB card and go from there, but I haven't seen one in the ~/ location, and I don't want to run one in from interstate).
    Still not underestimating the power...

    There is no such thing as bad information - There is truth in the data, so you sift it all, even the crap stuff.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator lupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gitsnik View Post
    I don't know about Goldhedge, but one of my systems (an EeePC) is only a 4GB model and I would prefer to do what I currently do and write to the 4GB SD Card for all my volatile data, and boot off the main drive for the OS.

    There is also the "BT is not yet in 'final' and I don't want to use a beta/release-candidate".

    (Yes I could get a 20GB card and go from there, but I haven't seen one in the ~/ location, and I don't want to run one in from interstate).
    I'm running BT4 Beta on my 4GB eePC

    I can understand the reticence about the "not in final" issue, but Ive been running BT4 Beta since it came out pretty much on a daily basis (I'm posting from BT4 Beta right now), and apart from some minor usability annoyances its been fine.

    In a case where better package management is an issue of concern it seems like BT4 might be at least worth looking at. If the concern is the amount of disk space used then its possible that it may be bigger than BT3, but I haven't done a close comparison of BT3 vs BT4 installs so I don't know...

    Anyway, if disk space is that much of an issue a better approach may be to install a minimal Linux build and then copy over the /pentest directory from BackTrack. It the distro used to build the minimal Linux system is fairly similar (Ubuntu for example) then the tools should still work.
    Capitalisation is important. It's the difference between "Helping your brother Jack off a horse" and "Helping your brother jack off a horse".

    The Forum Rules, Forum FAQ and the BackTrack Wiki... learn them, love them, live them.

  6. #6
    Very good friend of the forum Gitsnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Crystal Wind
    Posts
    851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lupin View Post
    I'm running BT4 Beta on my 4GB eePC
    First person I've found who can say that - everyone else recommends 8GB or more to account for the updates and such.

    As that is the case, I retract my previous statements and urge the OP to upgrade.
    Still not underestimating the power...

    There is no such thing as bad information - There is truth in the data, so you sift it all, even the crap stuff.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator lupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gitsnik View Post
    First person I've found who can say that - everyone else recommends 8GB or more to account for the updates and such.
    Well my comment above may have been a little misleading. Im actually running it on the eePC at the moment via using a persistent USB install on a 2GB USB stick. It would probably be possible to install it on the local storage if you used a similar method to the way the USB boot works (e.g. the squashfs image is stored on the device and is expanded and used to start the BT system at boot), but a regular install would be out of the question.

    Of course this installation method would make updates a right pain - you would need to either ignore them completely or manage the process by recreating the squashfs file on a different system periodically.
    Capitalisation is important. It's the difference between "Helping your brother Jack off a horse" and "Helping your brother jack off a horse".

    The Forum Rules, Forum FAQ and the BackTrack Wiki... learn them, love them, live them.

  8. #8
    Junior Member Goldhedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lupin View Post
    Its a good suggestion. One of the many things that has been improved in BT4 is the package management. Is there some reason you don't want to use BT4 Goldhedge?
    Lupin,

    KDE Desktop crashes too much on my system with BT4 and BT3 just runs smoother for me and, I would like to use it as my OS via Vmware for now.

    I've successfully uninstalled Firefox 2.0 using "removepkg" and have installed the latest Firefox version 3.5.3. I've even fixed the Firefox launch buttons and managed to save all the original Remote-exploit bookmarks toolbar which came with Firefox 2.0 and, I've updated Java as well.

    -GH

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •