On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 09:42:16PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 09:59:22PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 08:33:00PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> > > The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
> > > http://security.debian.org/pool/
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 09:59:22PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 08:33:00PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> > The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
> > http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
>
> Myself, I don't use Crapfox, and the
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 03:11:44PM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> I meant what I said. We have OGo connecting to a previously-existing
> mysql database, for mailshots etc. It works perfectly well. I can only
> speak from my experience.
You mean a mail merge?
--
Chris.
==
Reproduction if d
On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 09:52 +0100, Juraj Fedel wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 10:22:02AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Clarification:
> > When etch transitions from Testing to Stable, all the packages
> > (including, by that time, OpenOffice.org 2) will stay in etch/Stable.
>
> Is there any know
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:29:35AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 13:46 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > Backporting from security fixes in Mozilla or Firefox are to heavy
> > so they have considered to use 1.07 and rename it for Sarge.
>
> I thought that in those cases they a
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 10:22:02AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Clarification:
> When etch transitions from Testing to Stable, all the packages
> (including, by that time, OpenOffice.org 2) will stay in etch/Stable.
Is there any known timeline when this my happen?
Juraj Fedel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
> HOW can a newbie come to TESTING or UNSTABLE?
I did. Testing, specifically, and ran into all the trouble one would
expect.
> A newbie which come to "our" website, WILL download STABLE.
False. There are more examples than just I. Unless, of course, by
"our" you mean some other web site than D
Am 2005-11-17 08:48:33, schrieb loos:
> 1. Normal = most of them does just that.
I do not know ONE newbie which is using TESTING or UNSTABLE.
> 2. Debian unstable is just as good as a stable Fedora, etc.
My Development Workstation was broken several times in the last 4
month. There was no chan
Hi Antony,
Am 2005-11-15 11:11:02, schrieb Antony Gelberg:
> It's not that simple. A lot of newbies dive into testing or unstable
> because they "have" to have the newest stuff, then they don't know what
> to do when their system breaks.
HOW can a newbie come to TESTING or UNSTABLE?
A newbie w
On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 22:41 -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:40:32AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 22:43 -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
>
> > > So it's inefficent. So what?
> >
> > Because in 6 months or a year, when the size of that quick-and-dirty
> > DB grow
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:40:32AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 22:43 -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
> > So it's inefficent. So what?
>
> Because in 6 months or a year, when the size of that quick-and-dirty
> DB grows bigger than expected, and becomes vital to the organization
> (o
On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 22:23 +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 11:11 +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> >
> >>Steve Lamb wrote:
> >>
> >>>Andy Streich wrote:
[snip]
> No, it's not, and that's not what I said. I was pointing out that
> encouraging newbies to us
On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 22:43 -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 01:26:50AM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
>
> > I think users need to get back to learning a little. I was asked by a
> > customer yesterday why Thunderbird doesn't capitalise the H in Hello
> > like Outlook (Word) does.
On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 13:46 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2005-11-12 21:59:22, schrieb Marc Wilson:
>
> > Myself, I don't use Crapfox, and therefore don't pay any attention to its
> > Debian versioning, but if normal Debian practices are being followed,
> > security fixes are backported to s
Am 2005-11-12 17:05:54, schrieb Antony Gelberg:
> Antony Gelberg wrote:
> > http://www.debian.doc/releases might help you understand how releases
> > work in Debian.
>
> Oops. s/doc/com
| s/com/org/
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.or
Am 2005-11-13 11:32:16, schrieb Antony Gelberg:
> Bruce Hohl wrote:
> > OpenOffice 2.0 is an important piece of software.
>
>
>
> Why?
Because you will need biger CPU's and more memory in your
computer which will make the manufacturer richer. :-P
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 wit
Am 2005-11-14 23:27:29, schrieb Antony Gelberg:
> Michael Marsh wrote:
>
> > In short, the patched version of Firefox in sarge is *not* 1.0.7, so
> > calling it 1.0.7 would be a mistake.
> >
>
> Um, as I've said elsewhere in this thread, it is a newer upstream
> version than 1.0.4. Not sure exa
Am 2005-11-12 21:59:22, schrieb Marc Wilson:
> Myself, I don't use Crapfox, and therefore don't pay any attention to its
> Debian versioning, but if normal Debian practices are being followed,
> security fixes are backported to stable, rather than new and untested
> versions being packaged for sta
Am 2005-11-13 03:43:00, schrieb Oliver Lupton:
> > Firefox is currently @ 1.07 and every "point" release since 1.0 has been
> > due to security issues.
>
> Following the link you gave, I get to a file such as
> mozilla-firefox_1.0.4-2sarge5_i386.deb, I'm not entirely sure what the
> '-2' part mea
> > newbie - unstable, that's normal. If you like it that way. And they will
> > learn a lot.
>
> Why is it normal for a newbie to use unstable? It's usually an initial
> period of "look at me, I'm using Debian without having to use their
> cruddy old software" followed by a cry for help, either
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 01:26:50AM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> I think users need to get back to learning a little. I was asked by a
> customer yesterday why Thunderbird doesn't capitalise the H in Hello
> like Outlook (Word) does. I was too speechless to suggest just typing
> properly.
>
>
--- loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > 9- # chmod 777
> > /opt/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice
> > This step seemed but soffice was installed
> > with mode 000 and therefore could not be executed
> > (started).
>
>
> Bad idea, there are a lot of steps between 000 and
777
> Don't ever u
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:52:55PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Carl Fink wrote:
> > What the Access-like features of OOo 2 let one do is create and manipulate
> > and use databases WITHOUT SPENDING A LOT OF TIME LEARNING HOW.
>
> Ah... you mean inefficiently and incorrectly. Got it.
Ah, you'r
Carl Fink wrote:
> What the Access-like features of OOo 2 let one do is create and manipulate
> and use databases WITHOUT SPENDING A LOT OF TIME LEARNING HOW.
Ah... you mean inefficiently and incorrectly. Got it.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:33:37PM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
[OpenOffice.org's new database-front-end capabilities]
> I'd still like to know what, in business terms if you like, you can do
> with this, that you cannot do with e.g. LAMP.
It's a weird question. There's nothing there you can't
\
>
>
> 9- # chmod 777 /opt/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice
> This step seemed but soffice was installed with mode 000
> and therefore could not be executed (started).
Bad idea, there are a lot of steps between 000 and 777
Don't ever use 777
It is a program you don't need write p
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 18:25 -0800, Bruce Hohl wrote:
> > > It's not that simple. A lot of newbies dive into testing or
> unstable
> > > because they "have" to have the newest stuff, then they don't know
> > > what to do when their system breaks.
>
> > So it's Debian's *fault* that newbies whine wh
> > It's not that simple. A lot of newbies dive into testing or unstable > > because they "have" to have the newest stuff, then they don't know > > what to do when their system breaks. > So it's Debian's *fault* that newbies whine when they make no effort > to read the Debian web site? Gentlemen
Em Ter, 2005-11-15 às 16:44 -0600, Ron Johnson escreveu:
> On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 11:11 +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> > Steve Lamb wrote:
> > > Andy Streich wrote:
> > >
> > >>latest and greatest of everything. What I did find surprising after
> > >>reading
> > >>this list for a while was that
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 11:11 +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Andy Streich wrote:
> >
> >>latest and greatest of everything. What I did find surprising after
> >>reading
> >>this list for a while was that stable meant not only really stable but also
> >>really slow release c
Andy Streich wrote:
> latest and greatest of everything. What I did find surprising after reading
> this list for a while was that stable meant not only really stable but also
> really slow release cycle. Okay, that's the price you pay for "really
> stable."
Why be so hung up on release
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 05:50:18PM -0800, Andy Streich wrote:
> On Monday 14 November 2005 09:21 am, s. keeling wrote:
> > Stability is what Debian was trying to produce when Murdock & friends
> > began. That's still a cornerstone value. Considering all the
> > downstream distributions based on D
On Monday 14 November 2005 09:21 am, s. keeling wrote:
> Stability is what Debian was trying to produce when Murdock & friends
> began. That's still a cornerstone value. Considering all the
> downstream distributions based on Debian, that strategy is working well.
I agree. But as a relative new
Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Kent West wrote:
> >
> > No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security fixes and
> > the like.
>
> And that my friends, is Debian's biggest flaw when it comes to the
> desktop user. It's also why I'll never run stable
It is not a flaw. It's a desi
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:39:07PM -0200, loos wrote:
> Em Dom, 2005-11-13 ?s 17:19 -0500, Carl Fink escreveu:
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 11:16:27AM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> > > Carl Fink wrote:
> >
> > > >Why use a distro if you're going to have to manually install things
> > > >anyway?
> > >
Em Dom, 2005-11-13 às 17:19 -0500, Carl Fink escreveu:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 11:16:27AM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> > Carl Fink wrote:
>
> > >Why use a distro if you're going to have to manually install things anyway?
> > >
> > That might make sense if we were just installing an OS but everyon
Mark Crean wrote:
> I also run SuSE and have done for a few years now. It is normally every
> bit as stable as Debian Stable and security updates are often faster as
> well.
This of course feeds into the misconception of Stable. It's like "free
software" where people had to constantly say "Fr
Jon Dowland wrote:
> I think quite a lot of people are very happy to use stable on desktop
> systems. Most people who aren't are not typical desktop users
> themselves, but geeks or enthusiasts who want new-fangled stuff. For
> day-to-day office tasks and the like, a rock-solid base, where the
> la
Scott wrote:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
>>Scott wrote:
>>>And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.0, GIMP 3.0, GNOME 2.16, and KDE
>>>4.0 will be released within the following month discouraging many from
>>>sticking with Debian stable
>>You still misunderstand. The point is there is no one stand
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 11:16:27AM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> Carl Fink wrote:
> >Why use a distro if you're going to have to manually install things anyway?
> >
> That might make sense if we were just installing an OS but everyone
> certainly has different needs in applications.
That's why I s
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
BTW, I think Sarge is more than just "usable" for desktops right now.
What I fear as a long-time Debian user is that it'll have plenty of time
to BECOME obsolete, because Etch won't be released until 2010 or
something. If Etch goes frozen by June of next
Hugh Lawson wrote:
steef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
i used 10 years ago wp5.1. never found a better
Get dosemu working, find your old wp5.1 install floppies, and you can use
wp5.1 under Linux. See:
http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/linux.html
thanx!
steef
--
steef van du
--- Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 01:09:10PM +, Antony
> Gelberg wrote:
>
> > Version 1 has perfectly adequate support for
> > linking to databases.
>
> Where you presumably mean "barely usable support if
> you're already a database expert"? At least that's
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 02:36:05AM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Marc Wilson wrote:
> > if normal Debian practices are being followed, security fixes
> >are backported to stable, rather than new and untested versions being
> >packaged for stable.
>
> Now that you mention it, Ubuntu used to do this the
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 16:50 -0700, Scott wrote:
> Kent West wrote:
> >
> >
> >>3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
> >>Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
> >>Debian Stable. If so when?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/securit
steef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i used 10 years ago wp5.1. never found a better
Get dosemu working, find your old wp5.1 install floppies, and you can use
wp5.1 under Linux. See:
http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/linux.html
--
Hugh Lawson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 01:09:10PM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
In the time that you spent composing that post, you could have searched
the list archives and learnt how to install it. I doubt you could have
created any impressive documents in that time.
Why use a dis
On 11/13/05, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Brockway wrote:
> > It's normal for the Debian security team to backport changes into the
> > existing code base in Debian. Thus I expect the Firefox 1.04 to be the
> > vanilla source 1.04 plus backported security fixes. This is a _good_
> >
Antony Gelberg wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>>How about some more noise.
>>
>>The full and correct URL please?
>>
>>Is this perhaps what you meant?: http://www.debian.org/doc/
>
>
> http://www.debian.org/releases
>
Thanks! I'd actually seen that before but had forgotten where. :-) It's
nice to rev
Antony Gelberg wrote:
>
> Help yourself out by reading the debian-security-announce list.
That one I subbed to when I noticed it was there.
>Also
> available on Usenet as linux.debian.announce.security (yes, the words
> are swapped which is confusing). Also read follow-ups and other
> discussi
BTW, I think Sarge is more than just "usable" for desktops right now. What
I fear as a long-time Debian user is that it'll have plenty of time to
BECOME obsolete, because Etch won't be released until 2010 or something. If
Etch goes frozen by June of next year, the stable-only policy makes perfect
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 01:09:10PM +, Antony Gelberg wrote:
> Version 1 has perfectly adequate support for linking to databases.
Where you presumably mean "barely usable support if you're already a
database expert"? At least that's what *I* have.
> In the time that you spent composing tha
Scott wrote:
>Kent West wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>>3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
>>>Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
>>>Debian Stable. If so when?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security fixes and
>>the like.
>>
Original Message
Subject:Re: A few general questions from a Debian newbie
Resent-Date:Sat, 12 Nov 2005 20:40:36 -0600 (CST)
Resent-From:debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:22:44 -0500
From: Mark Grieveson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 02:42:25AM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Robert Brockway wrote:
> > It's normal for the Debian security team to backport changes into
> > the existing code base in Debian. Thus I expect the Firefox 1.04 to
> > be the vanilla source 1.04 plus backported security fixes. This is
> >
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 04:50:50PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Kent West wrote:
> > No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security fixes
> > and the like.
>
> And that my friends, is Debian's biggest flaw when it comes to the
> desktop user. It's also why I'll never run stable
I think q
Scott wrote:
[snip]
What Debian (or SOMEBODY please) needs is a new "stable" release at
least once a year with security updates, bugfixes AND *major* software
package (i.e 1.5 to 2.0, 3.6-4.0) updates to that release as the next
release is being simultaneously developed.
Wait, there is one I c
[Discussion on Debian version numbers and backporting]
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Scott wrote:
Perhaps, but it's also confusing to anyone coming to Debian from another
Linux distro. Let's just hope they *properly* update the user agent
string..
I say, that approach is fine, but why not show the ri
Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 04:55:36PM -0700, Scott wrote:
>
>>Marc Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>OpenOffice.org 2 will never be added to Debian stable. Instead, the next
>>>time there is a stable release (Etch), OpenOffice.org 2 will be included.
>>
>>And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>>And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.0, GIMP 3.0, GNOME 2.16, and KDE
>>4.0 will be released within the following month discouraging many from
>>sticking with Debian stable
>
>
> You still misunderstand. The point is there is no one standing there wi
Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Scott wrote:
>
>> I was absolutely blown away by this:
>>
>> The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
>> http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
>>
>> I'm rather surprised to see this. Why?
>>
>> Fire
Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 08:33:00PM -0700, Scott wrote:
>
>>The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
>>http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
> if normal Debian practices are being followed,
> security fixes are backporte
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Scott wrote:
I was absolutely blown away by this:
The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
I'm rather surprised to see this. Why?
Firefox is currently @ 1.07 and every "point" rele
Mark Grieveson wrote:
> tool, has been around forever; so, why do Linux word processors not have
> something that Windows word processors have had since mankind first
> realized the significance of having an opposable digit?
Problably because Linux programmers and users have evolved to the poi
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 08:33:00PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
> http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
Myself, I don't use Crapfox, and therefore don't pay any attention to its
Debian versioning, but if normal
Scott wrote:
> And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.0, GIMP 3.0, GNOME 2.16, and KDE
> 4.0 will be released within the following month discouraging many from
> sticking with Debian stable
You still misunderstand. The point is there is no one standing there with
a gun to their head forcing
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 04:55:36PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Marc Wilson wrote:
> > OpenOffice.org 2 will never be added to Debian stable. Instead, the next
> > time there is a stable release (Etch), OpenOffice.org 2 will be included.
>
> And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.0, GIMP 3.0, GNOME 2.16,
Mark Grieveson wrote:
>[] And now back to my first digression: I realize that Abiword's latest
> has a grammar check (coincidentally, I also had no problem installing
> the latest Abiword on Sarge, which means anyone could install it, the
> newest of the new, on Sarge).
That isn't true of all
Oliver Lupton wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>>>I was absolutely blown away by this:
>>>
>>>The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
>>>http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
>>>
>>>I'm rather surprised to see this. Why?
>>>
>>>Firefox is currently @ 1
> > OpenOffice 2.0 is an important piece of
> > software...added OpenOffice.org 2, to their
updates
> > repository shortly after it's release...it likely
> > will drive choice of distribution/version
>
> To my main point: I'm a desktop user, not a
> programmer, and I had no problem installing t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Scott wrote:
> I was absolutely blown away by this:
>
> The latest official Debian Sarge package for Firefox is for v 1.04!
> http://security.debian.org/pool/updates/main/m/mozilla-firefox/
>
> I'm rather surprised to see this. Why?
>
> Firefox is
Bruce Hohl wrote:
3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian
Unstable. Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be
added to Debian Stable. If so when?
>>>
>>>No. Stable does not get new packages, other than
>>>bug/security fixes and the like.
>>>
>>
>>And that my friends, is Debian
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 09:22:44PM -0500, Mark Grieveson wrote:
> And now back to my first digression: I realize that Abiword's latest
> has a grammar check (coincidentally, I also had no problem installing
> the latest Abiword on Sarge, which means anyone could install it, the
> newest of the
OpenOffice 2.0 is an important piece of software...added
OpenOffice.org 2, to their updates repository shortly after it's
release...it likely will drive choice of distribution/version
I'm pretty tired of reading about OpenOffice 2.0. I still prefer
WordPerfect 6.1, to be honest, and it was re
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Scott wrote:
And then OpenOffice.0rg 3, Firefox 2.0, GIMP 3.0, GNOME 2.16, and KDE
4.0 will be released within the following month discouraging many from
sticking with Debian stable
I think most people want a faster stable release cycle (though not as fast
as many dis
Scott wrote:
>Kent West wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>>3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
>>>Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
>>>Debian Stable. If so when?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security fixes and
>>the like.
>>
>>> 3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian
>>> Unstable. Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be
>>> added to Debian Stable. If so when?
>>>
>>
>> No. Stable does not get new packages, other than
>> bug/security fixes and the like.
>>
>
> And that my friends, is Debian's biggest flaw whe
Antony Gelberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>http://www.debian.doc/releases might help you understand how releases
>>work in Debian.
>
>
> One of these days I'll get it right. s/doc/org and apologies for the noise.
>
>
How about some more noise.
The full and correct URL please?
Is this perhaps what you mea
Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 07:56:18AM -0800, Bruce Hohl wrote:
>
>>3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
>> Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
>>Debian Stable. If so when?
>
>
> OpenOffice.org 2 will never be added to Debian stable. Instead, the
Kent West wrote:
>
>
>>3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
>>Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
>>Debian Stable. If so when?
>>
>>
>
> No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security fixes and
> the like.
And that my friends, is Debian's biggest fl
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 10:13 -0600, Kent West wrote:
> Bruce Hohl wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> >3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
> > Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
> >Debian Stable. If so when?
> >
> >
> No. Stable does not get new packages, other than bug/security
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 07:56:18AM -0800, Bruce Hohl wrote:
> 3- OpenOffice 2 was recently added to Debian Unstable.
> Is it likely that OpenOffice 2 will be added to
> Debian Stable. If so when?
OpenOffice.org 2 will never be added to Debian stable. Instead, the next
time there is a stable rel
Bruce Hohl wrote:
>I have been running Debian Stable on a PC and Debian
>Testing on a PC for a few months. All is well. I
>have a few questions:
>
>1- Compared to Debian Stable, Debian Testing has many
>more programs on the Gnome menu (many without icons).
>Will the next Stable release retain a
I have been running Debian Stable on a PC and Debian
Testing on a PC for a few months. All is well. I
have a few questions:
1- Compared to Debian Stable, Debian Testing has many
more programs on the Gnome menu (many without icons).
Will the next Stable release retain all these menu
items? Or,
84 matches
Mail list logo
