I need an old copy of the software Postnuke. I’m aware it’s outdated and discontinued but need to use it locally to use & convert a site which used to use this software.
I managed to find it using SourceForge (the 0.76 version) but it keeps hanging on the installation and I’m getting errors that don’t seem fixable to me on the step of inserting data (around 80%).
If any of the devs are around I’d really appreciate any assistance they could give me on how to get the “Set Login” stage working of the installer, specifically the start_postnuke() function because it’s missing the language and other variables from the PNconfig variable that are preventing it from installing.
I’m aware this is tagged as a Zikula question but it’s the only way I can find to try and contact who I assume are the developers of Postnuke.
You are right. Postnuke is dead. It died so long ago that nobody has any expertise. I doubt very much that installing the software is possible or truly necessary. You must have a database with info you are trying to access. Simply access it with whatever tools you are most comfortable with and pull and modify the data as needed. (fyi - I'm a former postnuke dev and current zikula dev. I've used PN since 0.62, so I know what I'm talking about).
If you really want to give it a go on getting a working installation I would recommend using the same server stack components that were "modern" at the time 0.76 was released. Apache, php, mysql. It will probably work then.
Since that time a lot of php functions have been made obsolete, and even syntax changed such as array shorthand notation.
But if you use a stack that's contemporary to that version, it should work.
Related
The title more or less says it all.
From what digging I've managed to do, the answer to if this is possible seems to be "no", but the whole GNU build tools platform is something I know very little about, so I could easily be missing some detail.
Context
I'm trying to set up an as-hermetic-as-I-can build of something that needs gnutls and I'm trying to minimize the list of things that need to be installed prior to the build (i.e. don't use the thing, or build the thing from source). One attribute of the build process is that the only accessible build artifact from gnutls will the absolute minimum needed to call and link it in (more or less the .a files and includes directory). So even if documentation is generated, it won't ever be accessible. As such, a dependency on a doc generation tool is something I strongly want to avoid.
What I've dug up
It seems, based on this merge-request comment, that gnutls requires that that gtkdocize be installed regardless of if it will be used. The context there seems to imply that this is by design to make the gnutls development process (as opposed to the use of gnutls) less error prone. (I'm really hoping I'm misreading things or that something has changed since then.)
This seems like an odd choice as it take a problem only experienced by developers and solves it by requiring anyone who wants to build the library (even as a transitive dependency) to assume that dependency even if they will actively suppress using it. (This seems particularly odd given this expands the potential attack surface for a security project.)
I'm currently working on an university research related software which uses statistical models in it in order to process some calculations around Item Response Theory. The entire source code was written in Go, whereas it communicates with a Rscript server to run scripts written in R and return the generated results. As expected, the software itself has some dependencies needed to work properly (one of them, as seen before, is to have R/Rscript installed and some of its packages).
Due to the fact I'm new to software development, I can't find a proper way to manage all these dependencies on Windows or Linux (but I'm prioritizing Windows right now). What I was thinking is to have a kind of script which checks if [for example] R is properly installed and, if so, if each used package is also installed. If everything went well, then the software could be installed without further problems.
My question is what's the best way to do anything like that and if it's possible to do the same for other possible dependencies, such as Python, Go and some of its libraries. I'm also open to hear suggestions if installing programming languages locally on the machine isn't the proper way to manage software dependencies, or if there's a most convenient way to do it aside from creating a script.
Sorry if any needed information is missing, I would also like to know.
Thanks in advance
I am working as a Data Scientist for a small start up and we are using R as part of our platform for analysis, dashboards etc. Therefore, I need to ensure that we maintain security with each package we use and load.
I have looked around and done extensive searching and have come across the following links:
This is the official R Studio Blog Security update page.
This blog post shows how you can implement rJava to help with those packages that require it, though it does state that '...the integrity & safety of the R package ecosystem is still in the “trust me, everything’s 👍!!”'
This post gives some good advice for package security, but basically boils down to: if you get it from CRAN or another trusted source then it should be ok.
The CVE site lists vulnerabilities, though the last one was back in 2017.
However, all the above links essentially say the same thing, which is "if its from CRAN (or similar), then it is probably fine". Now this might indeed be the case, but I was hoping for something a bit more rigorous. Has anyone else come across this issue with production R deployment?
If possible, if someone could direct to where I might be able to find out more information on checking for security updates, breaches and changes for R packages, or how to go about testing the security myself, I would be very grateful.
Thanks!
I've been looking at options for persistence when using RxSwift and Realm was looking attractive due to it's relative simplicity and the availability of some extensions in the community repo.
Unfortunately although I can get Realm and RxSwift working nicely in Xcode 8b6, things of seriously wrong as soon as you try to connect them together as RxRealm does not currently compile (there seems to be more going wrong with it than the Grand Renaming as far as I can tell).
Is there a workaround that is reliable? I can't believe for a moment that there isn't, I just can't find a resource at present. I was thinking of converting the Result object into an Set or Array and making this Observable but. I'm not sure if the contents (Realm Objects) are going to be handled correctly. Knowing my luck, I suspect not!
There's a Pull Request towards the RxRealm project adding Swift 3 support: https://github.com/RxSwiftCommunity/RxRealm/pull/26
I suggest you try using that.
More generally, targeting an Xcode beta will by definition give you a less stable software ecosystem, since no one is submitting apps with that and it's a moving target (often with weekly breaking changes). So if you want stable software, use stable tools. Realm and RxRealm both support Swift 2.2 quite well, so using that will give you the best experience.
I work in Visual Studio working on sites mostly myself and occasionally I start on new features for a site and bam a bug pops up on the live site and now I am in the middle of changes and can't post a fix to the bug until everything I started to change is complete.
So I am looking for a nice an simple way to work with this type of situation - any suggestions?
Are you asking for a recommendation of a source control system? SourceGear Vault is free for single users.
I am big fan of subversion. There also plugins for VS to work with subversion repository.
http://subversion.tigris.org/
http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/
I am in a similar situation and I use Perforce. It is free for up to two users and integrates well with Visual Studio.
Subversion is well supported and has tools for most any environment. It's also mostly straightforward to use, so you should be able to get up and running quickly.
If you need to work on a lot of separate features and bugs at the same time, you might try Mercurial instead. The tooling support is a lot less mature but I find the distributed design to do a better job of merging and facilitating work on separate issues concurrently.
But really, if you aren't using anything currently and aren't sure what your needs are, just choose one that has support in the IDE/tools you use. It will probably be Subversion.