Package: xorg-x11-utils
Version: 7.1-2
The xprop man pages read in part:
A $ followed by a number n causes field number n to be displayed. [...] $n+
will display field number n then a comma then field number n+1 then another
comma then ... until the last field defined. [...] This is useful f
> I looked at the man page and I do not see it wrong. Please specify where
> exactly you see the problem.
>
> Ritesh Raj Sarraf
The apt-offline man pages conclude with :
NOTE: On a freshly installed box, that was installed without
the network, the package database is null. In that case, you
fi
>> I installed the official package,
>> http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/a/apt-offline/apt-offline_1.5_all.deb,
>> on a fresh-from-the-factory BeagleBone Black rev. C (kernel 3.8.13-bone47,
>> architecture armv7l, OS 'Debian GNU/Linux 7.4 (wheezy)').
>
> Well. In that case I'm not sure
> Whatever is required is already a dependency, and is mentioned in the
> package's dependency relation. Are you using the official package, or
> the source ?
I installed the official package,
http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/a/apt-offline/apt-offline_1.5_all.deb,
on a fresh-from-t
Envoyé : 8 octobre 2014 06:26
> I cannot reproduce this problem.
>
> 15:52:59 rrs@learner:~$ apt-offline get /tmp/set.uris
> Fetching APT Data
> Downloading icewm-common 1.3.8-1 - 295 KiB
> [...]
> 15:53:51 rrs@learner:~$ sudo apt-offline install
> /tmp/apt-offline-downloads-10493
> /var/cache/ap
>> The apt-offline man pages conclude with :
>>
>> NOTE: On a freshly installed box, that was installed without
>> the network, the package database is null. In that case, you
>> first need to run apt-offline with just the --update option to
>> ensure that you have a meaningful package database
>>
> Can you provide the full log ? From the snippet of the verbose log, it
> looks like you provided it the full path to the actual deb. You are
> either required to give access to the directory path containing the
> debs, or give path to the .zip archive file name.
>
> As for the unzip tool, apt-off
Package: apt-offline
Version: 1.5
I'm trying to use apt-offline on a fresh Beagle Bone Black (rev C). I imported
the apt-offline_1.5_all.deb and installed it (using 'sudo dpkg -i
/apt-offline_1.5_all.deb'). It generates signature files just fine, but
when I try to install the packages into the
Package: apt-offline
Version: 1.5
The apt-offline man pages conclude with :
NOTE: On a freshly installed box, that was installed without
the network, the package database is null. In that case, you
first need to run apt-offline with just the --update option to
ensure that you have a meaningful p
Package: e2fsprogs
Version: 1.42
Severity : minor
Here is an abridged sample session highlighting the problem (on a French
system; examination of the English resize2fs strings shows the problem is the
same) :
(quote begins)
$ sudo fdisk /dev/sdb
Commande (m pour l'aide) : p
[...]
Périphérique A
-Message d'origine-
De : Theodore Ts'o [mailto:ty...@mit.edu]
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:14:28PM +0000, Thibault, Daniel wrote:
> >
> > In a project the size of Debian, inevitably there will be people with
> > whom you may disagree, or find it diff
I quote https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct :
(begin quote)
Debian "Code of Conduct"
Be respectful
In a project the size of Debian, inevitably there will be people with whom
you may disagree, or find it difficult to cooperate. Accept that, but even so,
remain respectful. Disagreemen
Package: e2fsprogs
Version: 1.42
Severity : minor
The resize2fs man pages read in part:
Note: when kilobytes is used above, I mean real, power-of-2 kilobytes,
(i.e., 1024 bytes), which some politically correct folks insist should
be the stupid-sounding ``kibibytes''. T
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.16.1.2ubuntu7.5
The Debian Policy Manual describes at 7.1 the syntax of relationship fields. To
test the syntax after running into trouble writing my own packages, I created a
directory 'test' containing a sample file (usr/src/test/TODO) and the usual
DEBIAN/conffile (s
This bug should be closed, POPT_ARGFLAG_OPTIONAL works as expected in
version 1.16 of libpopt0 (and probably much earlier).
Daniel U. Thibault
R & D pour la défense Canada - Valcartier (RDDC Valcartier) / Defence R&D
Canada - Valcartier (DRDC Valcartier)
Système de systèmes (SdS) / System
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
The so-far undocumented (in the man pages) POPT_ARGFLAG_TOGGLE argument flag
somehow corrupts the values recovered by popt for some values of POPT_ARG_*,
specifically an integer of any width.
To demonstrate, first note that the "bps" line of the popt man
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
The so-far undocumented (in the man pages) POPT_ARGFLAG_TOGGLE argument flag
is not always displayed correctly by poptPrintHelp() or poptPrintUsage().
Specifically, poptPrintUsage() never shows it, while poptPrintHelp() shows
it only if the option has no
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
The POPT_ARGFLAG_NOR and POPT_ARGFLAG_NAND logical operations are
incorrectly implemented, at least for the universally recognised logic tables
of the NOR and NAND operators.
Logical operations (OR, AND, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR) are possible when the
o
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
The string returned by the poptPrintUsage() function may be confusing when a
dual-named option (an option having both a short name and a long one) expects
an argument. In the popt man pages example, poptPrintUsage() outputs in part:
Usage: a.out [-chnr
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
The poptBadOption() function's return is confusing if the user supplies
amalgamated multiple short options, only some of which are "bad". The problem
does not occur with isolated bad short options nor with bad long options.
To use the popt man pages
Package: libpopt
Version: 1.16-1
Unambiguous shortening of long option names is a very common feature of
POSIX and GNU command lines. For instance, the documentation for tar states:
"Each option has at least one long (or mnemonic) name starting with two dashes
in a row, e.g., '--list'. [
21 matches
Mail list logo
