RE: Questions from a new debian user

2000-04-01 Thread Phoenix Amon
> Have a look in /var/log/xdm.log and see if you can find out why xdm > isn't restarting the X server (or perhaps you've deliberately set it > that way somewhere in /etc/X11/xdm?). Thanks, Colin, but I can't. I zapped both XDM and KDM to dust. :) And actually even if it was broken (it was a strai

RE: Questions from a new debian user

2000-03-31 Thread Phoenix Amon
> Why would you want to close X? You can also switch to a > virtual terminal > from X at any time using --F1 to F6 (there are six virtual > terminals at default). Well, for instance... if what you want to do from the terminal is upgrade your X server. :) Trying to do this from within X can be a

RE: Questions from a new debian user

2000-03-31 Thread Phoenix Amon
Hi Hillary. I'm about a week newer to Linux that you are... I know your bewilderment well. :) > 1. Is there a way to exit X without halting the computer? The methods > I've tried have either shut down the computer correctly or > brought me back > to the X login prompts. If you're in the login

RE: Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-29 Thread Phoenix Amon
> Lying to dpkg eventually causes huge problems and usually a > re-install. Uh-oh! :) Well, I'll probably do a clean install when potato is released as stable anyway. I still don't have an awful lot riding on the current installation. Maybe I'll even try installing apache/php/mysql/mod_ssl/open

RE: Difference between woody and potato

2000-03-23 Thread Phoenix Amon
> Phoenix writes: > > 2.2 is potato... > > No. 2.2 will be potato when it is released. 2.2 does not exist yet. Hmm. Is that right? The newsletters have been referring to potato as "a.k.a. release 2.2" since it's been frozen. Is it actually 2.2 now, or will it not be 2.2 until it's released? An

RE: Difference between woody and potato

2000-03-23 Thread Phoenix Amon
> I'm a bit confused about woody and potato. I though that potato is > always the newest, bleeding edge distribution. And that woody is the > code-name for the 2.2 release. Each version has a code name. The code name doesn't relate to whether the distribution is in stable or unstable or frozen

Re: Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-23 Thread Phoenix Amon
Jonas wrote: > Have a look at the equivs package. The other programs should find > your programs as long as you have them in the $PATH. For anyone who's interested, I took this route since it would solve the problem once and for all. Other than the fact that the equivs package fails to list its o

Re: Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-22 Thread Phoenix Amon
> I'd go with one of the ways you suggested in passing in your earlier > post; use Debianized source. > > If you install dpkg-dev and devscripts, it's almost trivial (once you > know how) to build a package from source; just do the following: Colin, Thanks for the tip. I unfortunately didn't di

Re: Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-22 Thread Phoenix Amon
> I learned how to use dpkg from reading the man page. The thing is, you > did know that for which you were looking, else I wouldn't have been able > to find the answer. Before you asked, I didn't know how to do it (because > I never wanted to). Well, I'll gladly agree to disagree. The last thing

Re: Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-22 Thread Phoenix Amon
> 1. Use the --ignore-depends flag. > 2. RTFM; it's right there. "man dpkg" (if you've installed man-db). Thanks and I did. I always do. :) Sometimes TFM doesn't give quite enough info if you don't already know what you're looking for. In a lot of cases TFM serves you well if you know what you're

Lying to dpkg?

2000-03-22 Thread Phoenix Amon
I've installed Linux/Apache on my standalone home box so that I can mirror and locally test my web sites using dummy network interfaces. I needed PHP, mySQL, SSL and Apache to all work together nicely, and I couldn't make that happen installing from debs (primarily mysql wouldn't talk to php...