On 7 Jun 1998, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > "Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> I know it has been a long time since we have dealt with
> Dale> these problems. It is for this reason that I can't remember
> Dale> what the solution was.
>
> Dale> I have
> "Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> I know it has been a long time since we have dealt with
Dale> these problems. It is for this reason that I can't remember
Dale> what the solution was.
Dale> I have a client trying to install 1.3 and the kernel gets
I know it has been a long time since we have dealt with these problems. It
is for this reason that I can't remember what the solution was.
I have a client trying to install 1.3 and the kernel gets almost
completely through the initialization stages before rebooting. Is the
tecra kernel the fix for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I found a small bug with installation of 1.3.0 last night while
installing on a friend's Toshiba Tecra Laptop.
The problem deals with the kernel/pcmcia services.
He has a Panasonic pcmcia 4x CDROM. It is supported by pcmcia and I
have had it working in linux b
I was involved in a complete new installation of a 1.3 machine yesterday,
showing the college's computer officer how good Linux and Debian can be.
I'm very glad to report there were _no_ problems whatsoever on the way
through the installation.
We now have a machine up and running with DNS servic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Mortimer) wrote on 08.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Jun 8, Kai Henningsen wrote
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [dselect fails to install main
> > > packages depending on ones in non-free or contrib]
> >
> > W
On Jun 8, Kai Henningsen wrote
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > [dselect fails to install main packages depending on ones in non-free
> > or contrib]
>
> Well, this is one thing that dpkg-mountable seems to get right. Maybe
> other installation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I wound up in a catch-22 with some of the extra packages:
> - ghostview and gv both depend on gs. However, package gs-alladin which
> provides gs never gets installed because dselect tries to: gs-alladin is
> in non-free
I just installed frozen on a machine here destined to be a router. I used
the May-20 disks and the ftp method within dselect. All went pretty well
except:
in the Packages file "at" is versioned "at_3.1.6-1.deb"
while the actual file in bo/binary-i386/admin is at_3.1.7-1.deb. I used
dpkg
Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i'm missing the same thing: debian should have a database with error
> reports and how to fix them. every big bug should be documented (we had
> this bud , and you can solve it this way : . it's
> also fixed in the new release debian and in the pa
correct analysis except:
> As it happens xdm-shadow works fine on non-shadow systems, so I believe the
> maintainer has (or is about to) uploaded a copy where xdm and xdm-shadow are
> the same (shadow enabled) binary.
Not uploaded yet -- it's just one of the things I'll be sure the 3.3
upload g
In your email to me, Andreas Jellinghaus, you wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, Jim Pick wrote
> > This flaw needs to be publicized a bit more. I'm sure I would have
> > figured out the problem via the bug system eventually - but I shouldn't
> > have to do that.
> >
> > Is there a document where "Errata" ca
On Jun 3, Jim Pick wrote
> This flaw needs to be publicized a bit more. I'm sure I would have
> figured out the problem via the bug system eventually - but I shouldn't
> have to do that.
>
> Is there a document where "Errata" can go? How about a release-specific
> FAQ that we can update after
> > The fix is very simple: ctrl-alt-F1; log in as root; shadowconfig off;
> > return to x and log in normally. But you do have to know this.. and there
> > is no warning when installing shadow or xdm.
>
> Arrrghhh!
>
> I spent two hours yesterday (past midnite) on the phone with a client
> try
and don't forget, there's *still* no written-down policy on shadow:
% grep -i shadow /usr/doc/dpkg/programmer.html/*
Exit 1
I mean, I will get this straightened out with 3.3, but the
picky-detail side of me is still miffed that debian's shadow policy is
still basically hearsay. :-}
--
TO UNSUBS
> The xserver packages want to setup x, this gets stuck because xinitrc is
> missing because it is part of xbase - which is not installed at that
Hmm. Yeah, I think I've probably always won because I use dpkg from
the shell, and with globbing get everything in alphabetical order :-)
The problem
> I did find a serious problem after rebooting (ok, I could probably have
> done this more subtle) the machine to start xdm. From reading several
> debian related lists I already knew that xdm will break with shadow
> passwords. However, I doubt if everyone who just installed debian 1.3 will
> rea
From: "J.P.D. Kooij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> We are in the process of releasing Debian 1.3 .
Tonight I made another attempt to install base + 300 packages. I've added
the list to the end of this message.
I experienced a _major_ problem with shadow and xdm,
> # mv /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm-shadow /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm
> I can switch back and forth between shadow and non-shadow passwords,
> and can login via xdm just fine. Nothing bad happened, my machine
> hasn't exploded yet, etc. :-)
Ah, I see, it just logs an error, but doesn't actually fail. (The
code on
Hi,
Mark Eichin:
> 2) the xdm shadow support doesn't fall back in any sane way,
> and it's more than just dropping a check -- a bunch of code needs
> rearrangement. (If you run xdm-shadow on a non-shadow system, you *lose*...)
Well, I just did that with xbase-3.2-6:
# mv /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm
nope, recent versions of xbase aren't any better about shadow support,
because
1) there's nothing in the programmers guide even mentioning it
2) the xdm shadow support doesn't fall back in any sane way,
and it's more than just dropping a check -- a bunch of code needs
rearrangement.
Hi,
> Presumably, you installed xdm after installing shadow. shadowconfig edits
> /etc/init.d/xdm to switch between using xdm and xdm-shadow, so all you need
> to
> do is:
>
> shadowconfig off
> shadowconfig on
>
> and all should be well.
Yes, thank you!
But I think, the xbase package
> Hi,
>
> > 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages
> > merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in
> > any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I
> > deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and tha
At 09:26 AM 19/05/97 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
>> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages
>> merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in
>> any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I
>> deinstalled shadow
Hi,
> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages
> merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in
> any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I
> deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and that still didn
> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages
> merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in
> any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I
> deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and that still didn't fi
At 10:07 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote:
>But is the last line in the file?
Certainly is. I just saw someone post on a 'login' bug that they couldn't
log in as anyone except for root because of the passwd file being mode 600
- this isn't the case for me.
the daemon.log reports this:
May 19 1
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 02:09 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote:
> >This might be because the + entry is not at the end? (5634, 8734) I
> >plan to release a new passwd package today which fixes this.
>
> I'm pretty sure I tried putting +:: in both /etc/passwd and /etc/s
At 02:09 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote:
>This might be because the + entry is not at the end? (5634, 8734) I
>plan to release a new passwd package today which fixes this.
I'm pretty sure I tried putting +:: in both /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow
- still no success there I think.
--
Karl Ferg
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. After completing the badblocks scan when 'initalizing' a hard disk, it
> starts writing the tables - I get "Could not get a free page..." error come
> up - however the format finishes and the partition seems fine and usable.
This is a kernel problem,
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages
> merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in
> any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I
> deinstalled shadow by doing
Hi Guys.
I just tested the new 1.3 disks and the system seems great. Of course,
there are some little qwerks which I'm not sure if they're related to my
hardware or not. They are:
1. After completing the badblocks scan when 'initalizing' a hard disk, it
starts writing the tables - I get "Could
32 matches
Mail list logo
