On 05/16/2010 03:35 AM, AG wrote:
Using Iceweasel, I enable the tor button and receive a warning message
"Tor proxy test: local HTTP proxy is unreachable. Is polipo running
properly?"
Well, no because polipo wasn't installed - why and when this suddenly
became a necessity I don't know, but anywa
On 05/12/2010 08:08 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 5/12/2010 6:49 AM, Snood wrote:
I'm looking forward to seeing if nouveau will be an improvement,
performance-wise, without causing reliability issues.
I am, however, going to wait and install nouveau the easy way, once the
upgrade to xserver
On 05/11/2010 09:43 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote:
Saw that xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package is now in the main
repository.
It does not appear to be in Sid or Squeeze as of this afternoon. (EST USA)
yes. However, I notice that 'nv' is still in Squeeze-main contrib non-free:
xserver-xorg-video-nv
On 01/-10/-28163 02:59 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote:
> I don't have Nvidia myself, but tt should be a matter of installing
Nouveau,
> and then changing the "Driver" line in /etc/x11/xorg.conf from "nv" to
> "Nouveau"
> (or adding the line in the "Device" section if it doesn't exist).
Good old /etc
On 01/-10/-28163 02:59 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2010-05-11 17:06 +0200, Snood wrote:
Did some research on Nouveau drivers. Was about to download, compile,
etc. Saw that xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package is now in the main
repository. Does that mean that going through all the machinations is
Did some research on Nouveau drivers. Was about to download, compile,
etc. Saw that xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package is now in the main
repository. Does that mean that going through all the machinations is no
longer necessary?
If I tell aptitude (ncurses) to install the package it also indic
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:17:56AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
Does this mean that it is OK to CC people now, without a CC
being requested? Or do many people read the list via the web
interface to the mailing list archives without being subscribed
and will still get annoyed if they are CCed? I
Andrei Popescu wrote:
In general I prefer to keep at least one different kernel version
installed, Just In Case, but in this particular case I too did get rid
of the -trunk- image ASAP because:
- it shouldn't have been uploaded to unstable in the first place
- it messes up the usual boot ord
Wolodja Wentland wrote:
Ok - You really have only one linux-image-* package installed and you've
installed it directly, i.e. it was not installed as a dependency of a
meta-package.
Yes, I think I understand. I used a netinst disc to install the
operating system. In Lenny installed via netinst
Wolodja Wentland wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 17:51 -0400, Snood wrote:
Stephen Powell wrote:
Sam wrote:
First of all, you replied to me personally instead of to the list.
I'm putting this back on the list where it belongs.
Same happened here.
If you have already done the upgrade
Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Mon,15.Mar.10, 17:51:01, Snood wrote:
I know about rebooting and purging. I've done it lots before. It's
not working that way in this case. Honestly. There's just no
evidence that I can find that there's more than one kernel to select
from. In fa
Wayne wrote:
Snood wrote:
dpkg -l linux-image |grep ^i
will show you that the version, -3, changed. The name did not.
Wayne
That command results in nothing at all on my system. Is that significant?
No, because, stupid me, forgot to type it correctly. Try this
dpkg -l linux-image
Stephen Powell wrote:
Sam wrote:
Maybe I don't understand how aptitude works for this case. From
everything I can see, if I remove the kernel that aptitude lists as
obsolete, I won't have any kernel at all.
First of all, you replied to me personally instead of to the list.
I'm putting this bac
Following a slew of updates in Debian testing this morning I noticed
that linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686 (2.6.32-5) is listed by aptitude as
being obsolete.
I suppose the update that resulted in this was probably
firmware-linux-free 2.6.32-5 -> 2.6.32-9
I've never seen anything like this before
14 matches
Mail list logo