On Fri 25 Sep 2020 at 12:28:31 (+), Andy Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:49:19AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> > > "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> > > IPv4 address (but isn't guarantee
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:49:19AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> > "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> > IPv4 address (but isn't guaranteed to).
>
> unicorn:~$ hostid
> 007f0101
>
> Doesn't look
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> IPv4 address (but isn't guaranteed to).
unicorn:~$ hostid
007f0101
Doesn't look very useful. That's just 127.0.1.1 in a 16-bit little
endian format.
> On a systemd
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 08:49:07AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:38:55 -0400
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > So you're just doing "sleep 1" every time.
>
> Ah, thank you. Yup. Which is weird, because it worked when I first
> wrote that many years ago.
In cron scripts w
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 08:49:07AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> Ah, thank you. Yup. Which is weird, because it worked when I first
> wrote that many years ago.
"Many years ago", sh was probably a link to bash, rather than dash.
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:38:55 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> In dash, RANDOM does nothing; it's just an empty variable. And as it
> turns out, dash treats that as a zero.
>
> unicorn:~$ dash
> $ echo $((1 + RANDOM % 1200))
> 1
> $ echo $((1 + % 1200))
> dash: 2: arithmetic expression: expecting pr
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 08:10:04AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:53:59 -0400
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > RANDOM is a bashism, not available in sh, so that won't work in a
> > crontab unless you've altered which shell cron is using to parse the
> > crontab.
>
> Well, that
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:53:59 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> RANDOM is a bashism, not available in sh, so that won't work in a
> crontab unless you've altered which shell cron is using to parse the
> crontab.
Well, that's interesting. The file I pulled that from (in /etc/cron.d)
sets two variables
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 07:23:28AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
>5 3 ** * rootsleep $( echo $((1 +
> RANDOM \% 1200)) ) ; /usr/bin/apt-get update > /dev/null && /usr/bin/apt-get
> -dy dist-upgrade > /dev/null
RANDOM is a bashism, not available in sh, so
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 22:36:36 +0200
Pòl Hallen wrote:
> like ubuntu, what's the best way to show a notify alert (via
> terminal) about available packages?
I take it you mean, *new* available packages. I don't know how Ubuntu
does it, so I'll tell you what I do. And the answe
On 9/23/2020 10:36 PM, Pòl Hallen wrote:
Hi :-)
like ubuntu, what's the best way to show a notify alert (via terminal)
about available packages?
I can't talk about Ubuntu but you could use a cronjob that checks
periodicly for new updates and use 'wall' to notify the users.
--
John Doe
Hi :-)
like ubuntu, what's the best way to show a notify alert (via terminal)
about available packages?
thanks! :)
--
Pol
I'm just a very curious guy...
On 7/7/05, Dexter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I don't know, maybe they use different cache.
> But I'm curious, why do you need to know number of available packages?
> What is this information good for?
>Dexter2
>
Well, I don't know, maybe they use different cache.
But I'm curious, why do you need to know number of available packages?
What is this information good for?
Dexter2
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 10:14 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> Thanks, but 'apt-cache stats' tell
get". Those are commands for
> searching and installing debian packages on command line. Maybe you can
> make some script of it. See manuals.
>Dexter2
>
>
> On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 06:14 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Could someone tell me of
d someone tell me of commands that will help me see a number of
> available packages. Currently I could only do that with 'synaptic'
> which is all I use it for.
>
> malebo
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Could someone tell me of commands that will help me see a number of
available packages. Currently I could only do that with 'synaptic'
which is all I use it for.
malebo
Rick Pasotto wrote:
>I'm thinking of getting an AMD-64 machine. Is there an easy way to see
>if all the packages I currently have installed are available in the ia64
>distribution?
>
>
>
It is easier to see which ones are not available. Anyway, AMD64 uses an
amd64 port, not the ia64. ie64 is for
On Wednesday 25 May 2005 09:27 am, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> I'm thinking of getting an AMD-64 machine. Is there an easy way to
> see if all the packages I currently have installed are available in
> the ia64 distribution?
Some helpfull links. The IA64 is for Itanium, separate from the
amd64/emt64 ar
I'm thinking of getting an AMD-64 machine. Is there an easy way to see
if all the packages I currently have installed are available in the ia64
distribution?
--
If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six sharpening my axe.
-Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)
Rick Pasotto[EMAIL PROT
On Fri, Dec 24, 2004 at 08:35:30PM -0800, cfk wrote:
> To see what happens. How do you do it.
apt-get install '.*'
(this won't work, it will output a great list of conflicts - it's
worth reading that list of conflicts to get an idea of the magnitude
of what you are proprosing to do.)
If yo
To see what happens. How do you do it.
On Friday 24 December 2004 20:16, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2004 at 08:16:26PM -0800, cfk wrote:
> > Is there a way to tell synaptic or apt-get to install all available
> > packages in testing and if so, what might it be?
>
>
On Fri, Dec 24, 2004 at 08:16:26PM -0800, cfk wrote:
> Is there a way to tell synaptic or apt-get to install all available packages
> in testing and if so, what might it be?
No, because many of the packages conflict. (For instance, you
probably don't want Exim, Postfix, AND Sendmail
Is there a way to tell synaptic or apt-get to install all available packages
in testing and if so, what might it be?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27; (meaning selected and
> installed) or 'rc' (meaning removed, but not purged--IOW, they were once
> installed). This couldn't possibly be all available packages for
> debian/testing because, for instance, I'm not using X and never have on
> that machine.
>
&g
for dpkg-query(8), but when I do
a dpkg -l, all the packages listed are either 'ii' (meaning selected and
installed) or 'rc' (meaning removed, but not purged--IOW, they were once
installed). This couldn't possibly be all available packages for
debian/testing because
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.10.18
Severity: minor
On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 11:07:07AM +0100, Mario Vukelic wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-02-14 at 03:24, Colin Watson wrote:
> > 'dpkg -p' lists whatever's in /var/lib/dpkg/available; 'dpkg -l'
> > lists whatever's in /var/lib/dpkg/status.
>
> Uh, for me (dpkg
On Sat, 2004-02-14 at 03:24, Colin Watson wrote:
> 'dpkg -p' lists whatever's in /var/lib/dpkg/available; 'dpkg -l' lists
> whatever's in /var/lib/dpkg/status.
Uh, for me (dpkg 1.9.21) man says -l lists available, and -p
dpkg -p|--print-avail package
Display details about package, as f
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 10:43:34PM +0200, Shaul Karl wrote:
> Is it a bug that
>
> dpkg -p kernel-source-2.6.2
>
> shows information about kernel-source-2.6.2 while
>
> dpkg -l kernel-source-2.6.2
>
> claims the Version is and the Description is (no description
> available)? It
Shaul Karl wrote:
Is it a bug that
dpkg -p kernel-source-2.6.2
shows information about kernel-source-2.6.2 while
dpkg -l kernel-source-2.6.2
claims the Version is and the Description is (no description
available)? It looks like dpkg -l refers only to packages that are
installed
Is it a bug that
dpkg -p kernel-source-2.6.2
shows information about kernel-source-2.6.2 while
dpkg -l kernel-source-2.6.2
claims the Version is and the Description is (no description
available)? It looks like dpkg -l refers only to packages that are
installed, which is not th
Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:16:29AM +1030, David Purton wrote:
>> amonst these packages are (interestingly)
>>
>> lilo (!)
>> version 21.4.3-2 installed
>> version 1:21.6-2 available according to debain web site
>>
>> why are these version numb
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:16:29AM +1030, David Purton wrote:
>
> I've noticed that since I upgradeed to woody, dselect thinks that a
> number of packages are now obsolete.
>
> The versions I currently have installed are from potato, but on
> searching for the packages at search.debian.org, it su
I've noticed that since I upgradeed to woody, dselect thinks that a
number of packages are now obsolete.
The versions I currently have installed are from potato, but on
searching for the packages at search.debian.org, it suggests that there
should be more recent versions available, but apt-get up
Recently, after a lot of apt-get dist-upgrade, I noticed that my
/var/cache/apt/archive had many copies of the same packages.
So, I tried a man apt-get and found the option clean. I tried it but it removed
everything.
I just want it to remove the old packages, keeping the most recent in their
p
I screwed things up. I wanted to install E on my system but didn't want to go
the long route of finding every single file I did to update so I downloaded
chunks of slink with the package file and used the mounted option. I had
previously installed from using the mountable option and merging the 3
36 matches
Mail list logo
