I don't know the answer to that one but one possibility is that the
package was present but that the 'Packages' had not yet been replaced.
I did not look at the time stamps so I have no idea if that could
possibly have been the problem but only that during 'archive
maintenance' the various 'Packages' files could be 'out of sync' with
what is actually present in the areas that the file cover.
In the future, even if that was not the problem this time, you might
want to take a look in the root of the debian tree to see if the zero
length file "Archive-Maintenance' is present. When that file is present
there is a possibility that either a package that is present will not be
listed in the package file or that there will be files listed that are
not in the archive.
> I was using ftp.debian.org for the ftp setting on dselect but all it
> found was 2.0.29 and 2.0.30 kernel-source packages.....why didn't it
> find the 2.0.33 you list above?
--
best,
-bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign:
"The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!"
See! They do get some things right!
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
