Hi,
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 05:16:51PM +0900, John Crawley wrote:
> On 18/01/2025 23:01, Andy Smith wrote:
> The *-updates suite is something different from security upgrades.
>
> To get bookworm security upgrades the necessary apt line is something like:
>
> deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-s
On 18/01/2025 23:01, Andy Smith wrote:
After a stable release of Debian is made, future package updates will
come from the stable-updates suite (e.g. bookworm-updates in the case
of Debian 12). These updates will in most cases contain the same version
of the software from stable suite but with a
On Sunday, 19-01-2025 at 01:21 Nicolas George wrote:
> Andy Smith (12025-01-18):
> > One particular consequence of this process of making a stable release is
> > that generally no new features will ever come to the packages in it.
>
> No new *features* is not the point of Debian stable, though,
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 07:12:30PM +1100, George at Clug wrote:
>
> Thanks Roberto, and others who tried to explain Backporting, I will
> need to read this and think about it for a while.
>
> To make comment, I stay away from FlatPacks (the MS world tried this
> kind of technology once, I wonder
Andy Smith (12025-01-18):
> One particular consequence of this process of making a stable release is
> that generally no new features will ever come to the packages in it.
No new *features* is not the point of Debian stable, though, only a side
effect.
The point is: no changes in behavior.
When
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025, Nicolas George wrote:
> Andy Smith (12025-01-18):
>> Why do you continue to post to this list
>
> Why do you continue replying?
maybe pocket is an ai toy designed to annoy andy smith
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 02:53:23PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> Andy Smith (12025-01-18):
> > Why do you continue to post to this list
>
> Why do you continue replying?
Sometimes in an attempt to understand Pocket's behaviour. I mean, I'm
aware it's easy to just write it off as trolling.
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 12:14:16PM +1100, George at Clug wrote:
> On Saturday, 18-01-2025 at 11:47 John Hasler wrote:
> > In the case of rsync Debian backported a fix. Therefor it gets the old
> > version number with a suffix to indicate that Debian patched it. In the
> > case of chromium up
Andy Smith (12025-01-18):
> Why do you continue to post to this list
Why do you continue replying?
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 03:19:16AM +0100, poc...@homemail.com wrote:
> Oh I see you would rather stick your fingers in your ears and pretend all is
> well.
>
> I determine what is right for me, you certainly don't
Why do you continue to post to this list if you believe that there are
Linux
Thanks Roberto, and others who tried to explain Backporting, I will need to
read this and think about it for a while.
To make comment, I stay away from FlatPacks (the MS world tried this kind of
technology once, I wonder if they still do)?
I prefer stability and hence Debian Stable with its "
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 03:19:16AM +0100, poc...@homemail.com wrote:
[...]
> Oh I see you would rather stick your fingers in your ears and pretend all is
> well.
In some cases, that's the right idea, yes. You kind of prove it.
> I determine what is right for me, you certainly don't
Exactly. T
On 1/17/25 20:30, Max Nikulin wrote:
On 18/01/2025 07:34, George at Clug wrote:
Would I be correct in assuming this is because the version of Chromium
(as in its features) are being updated within Debian 12
Major browsers are an exception. Security fixes are frequent and
massive. The upstr
On Saturday, 18-01-2025 at 12:30 Max Nikulin wrote:
> On 18/01/2025 07:34, George at Clug wrote:
> > Would I be correct in assuming this is because the version of Chromium
> > (as in its features) are being updated within Debian 12
>
> Major browsers are an exception. Security fixes are freque
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 03:21:48 +0100
poc...@homemail.com wrote:
> > Stefan
> >
>
> All your post end up in the spam directory of my account on mail.com.
> I need to leave them there.
Oh, come on, Pocket. He was trolling you, apparently successfully.
Turnabout is fair play.
--
Does anyb
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 8:30 PM Max Nikulin wrote:
>
> On 18/01/2025 07:34, George at Clug wrote:
> > Would I be correct in assuming this is because the version of Chromium
> > (as in its features) are being updated within Debian 12
>
> Major browsers are an exception. Security fixes are frequent
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2025 at 9:10 PM
> From: "Stefan Monnier"
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Are Debian packages updated within a release?
>
> > That is why the rolling release method is superior to the old model
> > used by oth
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2025 at 9:10 PM
> From: "Roberto C. Sánchez"
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Are Debian packages updated within a release?
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 02:36:34AM +0100, poc...@homemail.com wrote:
> >
> > T
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 at 01:14, George at Clug wrote:
> So this means that a patched version from :
[...]
> deb https://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm-backports main contrib non-free
> non-free-firmware
[...]
> Was copied into debian-security as in:
> deb https://security.debian.org/debian-se
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 02:36:34AM +0100, poc...@homemail.com wrote:
>
> That is why the rolling release method is superior to the old model used by
> others.
>
s/superior/different/
>
> Most rolling release distributions do the same and you get the latest
> updates, features and fixes
>
We
> That is why the rolling release method is superior to the old model
> used by others.
Yes, and for the same reason non-rolling release distributions of
GNU/Linux don't exist. Actually, for that same fundamental reason,
there is only one GNU/Linux distribution (the one that "is
superior").
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 12:14:16PM +1100, George at Clug wrote:
>
> I rarely use backports, but when I do, I like the "adjusted and
> recompiled for usage on Debian stable" part, much better that grabbing
> packages from other distributions and just installing them, hoping
> there will not be issu
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2025 at 8:30 PM
> From: "Max Nikulin"
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Are Debian packages updated within a release?
>
> On 18/01/2025 07:34, George at Clug wrote:
> > Would I be correct in assuming this is because
On 18/01/2025 07:34, George at Clug wrote:
Would I be correct in assuming this is because the version of Chromium
(as in its features) are being updated within Debian 12
Major browsers are an exception. Security fixes are frequent and
massive. The upstream teams do not maintain stable version
On Saturday, 18-01-2025 at 11:47 John Hasler wrote:
> In the case of rsync Debian backported a fix. Therefor it gets the old
> version number with a suffix to indicate that Debian patched it. In the
> case of chromium upstream patched it and released the patched version
> with a new version nu
In the case of rsync Debian backported a fix. Therefor it gets the old
version number with a suffix to indicate that Debian patched it. In the
case of chromium upstream patched it and released the patched version
with a new version number.
--
John Hasler
j...@sugarbit.com
Elmwood, WI USA
deb12u1 i386
chromium/stable 131.0.6778.139-1~deb12u1 i386
On Saturday, 18-01-2025 at 10:57 George at Clug wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Are Debian packages updated within a release?
>
>
> After running: "# apt update"
>
> # apt list -a linux-image-amd64
> Listing...
Hi,
Are Debian packages updated within a release?
After running: "# apt update"
# apt list -a linux-image-amd64
Listing... Done
linux-image-amd64/stable-backports 6.11.10-1~bpo12+1 amd64
linux-image-amd64/stable-updates 6.1.124-1 amd64 [upgradable from:
6.1.106-3]
linux-image-am
On 01/12/2024 09:04, jman wrote:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI writes:
Usually if the upstream provides a list of changes, it is included in
/usr/share/. But there isn't a standard for its name
(and much less for its contents), so look for names like NEWS,
Changelog, etc. Often it is gzipped.
The pat
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI writes:
Usually if the upstream provides a list of changes, it is included in
/usr/share/. But there isn't a standard for its name
(and much less for its contents), so look for names like NEWS,
Changelog, etc. Often it is gzipped.
The path you probably mean is /usr/share/
s. This is documented somewhere in
the Debian policy.
Is there a workflow or something else I can do to actually get an actual
summary of upstream changes, without jumping through loops trying to
reach the upstream project itself? Ideally this is something I would
like to do when upgrading
ject itself? Ideally this is
something I would like to do when upgrading my Debian packages.
Thanks!
Hello Debian Community Support Team,
I was already installed and compiled Kernel with rtai patches of
4.9.146-rtai_5.2
Can you suggest me proper steps to follow debian packages load in my kernel
please let me know.
Thank you,
Manish D.
@india
On 6/11/20 05:03, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection".
> I want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop environment"
> and/or "MATE" is checked.
Pretty much the same thing that happens when you enter the command
"tasksel," I thi
On 06/11/2020 06:24 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2020-06-11 at 07:03, Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection". I
want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop
environment" and/or "MATE" is checked.
If you want to know the specific sequ
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 02:21:50PM +0200, Marco Möller wrote:
> On 11.06.20 13:03, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection".
> > I want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop environment"
> > and/or "MATE" is checked.
> > TIA
>
> The
On Thu 11 Jun 2020 at 06:03:28 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection".
> I want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop environment"
> and/or "MATE" is checked.
> TIA
Checking "Debian desktop environment" alone gets you the ta
On 11.06.20 13:03, Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection".
I want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop environment"
and/or "MATE" is checked.
TIA
The for me most important observation is, that if deactivating all
listed deskto
On 2020-06-11 at 07:03, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection". I
> want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop
> environment" and/or "MATE" is checked.
If you want to know the specific sequence of coded actions, you'll have
to look
I'm interested in the installer menu titled "Software Selection".
I want to know explicitly what happens when "Debian desktop environment"
and/or "MATE" is checked.
TIA
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> I was just asking, in case there would be some advantage.
> For instance, it seems to install build dependencies automatically.
I understand. It is bothering to install dependencies, I agree - but it is
one time job. I do it when setting up the build environment - it take
On 2020-04-23 08:31:32 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > I was wondering whether apt-build could automate things even more
> > than my current solution, but it seems that my current solution can
> > do more, at least for the goal of just patching source packages and
> > rebuild
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> I was wondering whether apt-build could automate things even more
> than my current solution, but it seems that my current solution can
> do more, at least for the goal of just patching source packages and
> rebuilding.
I did not miss this in the beginning. I did not unde
On 2020-04-22 22:18:19 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > On 2020-04-22 08:29:09 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> >> OK I understand now. I did not have a problem to add a new section in the
> >> changelog with
> >> dch -v "4:$BUILDISTRO_NAME" -D "$DISTRO_NAME" -c $debian/changelog \
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2020-04-22 08:29:09 +0200, deloptes wrote:
>> OK I understand now. I did not have a problem to add a new section in the
>> changelog with
>> dch -v "4:$BUILDISTRO_NAME" -D "$DISTRO_NAME" -c $debian/changelog \
>> "Autogenerated by building script"
>>
>> $BUILDISTRO
On 2020-04-22 08:29:09 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> OK I understand now. I did not have a problem to add a new section in the
> changelog with
> dch -v "4:$BUILDISTRO_NAME" -D "$DISTRO_NAME" -c $debian/changelog \
> "Autogenerated by building script"
>
> $BUILDISTRO_NAME is the release number (14.
>
>
https://raphaelhertzog.com/2011/07/04/how-to-prepare-patches-for-debian-packages/
> mentions the use of dch, and it seems that the debdiff output
> will contain the change in the Debian changelog file, but even
> if apt-build can handle that (which I doubt), this is not O
produce the build
>
> in any case
>
> https://raphaelhertzog.com/2011/07/04/how-to-prepare-patches-for-debian-packages/
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/modify.en.html#fixupstream
> https://wiki.debian.org/debian/patches
>
> I think what you are missing i
-to-prepare-patches-for-debian-packages/
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/modify.en.html#fixupstream
https://wiki.debian.org/debian/patches
I think what you are missing is the quilt. when you register the patch in
the debian build, the build log should include some lines like applying
patc
On 2020-04-21 18:37:03 +0300, Reco wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 05:31:38PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2020-04-21 16:44:57 +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > apt install apt-build
> > >
> > > Requires some scripting to run without a human intervention, it's
> > > relatively simple.
> >
> > Can
Hi.
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 05:31:38PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2020-04-21 16:44:57 +0300, Reco wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:23:37PM +0200, Thomas Martin wrote:
> > > My goal is simple : I'm applying few modifications on some Debian
> > &g
Hi,
On 2020-04-21 16:44:57 +0300, Reco wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:23:37PM +0200, Thomas Martin wrote:
> > My goal is simple : I'm applying few modifications on some Debian
> > packages and would like those packages to be rebuilt with my changes
> > when a new pa
Hi,
Thank you, I will check this out.
Thomas
Le mar. 21 avr. 2020 à 15:45, Reco a écrit :
>
> Hi.
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:23:37PM +0200, Thomas Martin wrote:
> > My goal is simple : I'm applying few modifications on some Debian
> > packages and wo
Hi.
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:23:37PM +0200, Thomas Martin wrote:
> My goal is simple : I'm applying few modifications on some Debian
> packages and would like those packages to be rebuilt with my changes
> when a new package version is available.
apt install apt-build
Hello,
I would like to know what is the simplest way to rebuild Debian
packages automatically when a new version of the package is released ?
My goal is simple : I'm applying few modifications on some Debian
packages and would like those packages to be rebuilt with my changes
when a new pa
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 14:29 Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 02:26:26PM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> > Tixy, thanks. I did check the latest Deb 10 version but not the change
> log.
> > I was fooled by the Debian version number which looks like the BSD number
> > which I guess never
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 02:26:26PM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> Tixy, thanks. I did check the latest Deb 10 version but not the change log.
> I was fooled by the Debian version number which looks like the BSD number
> which I guess never changes.
https://www.debian.org/security/faq#version
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:13 Tixy wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 11:53 -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> > I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
> > installed it from Debian packages.
> >
> > In the process of reading a blog article
tem and I don't see any
> provision for systemd. I don't grok systemd very well and usually
> rely on others for the proper setup.
And that's why the lazy among us use Debian packages - because packages
tend to fix such problems.
> I have asked for help on the OpenSMTPD
Tom Browder writes:
> I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
> installed it from Debian packages.
>
> In the process of reading a blog article by the current developer I
> discovered the upstream is now at version 6.6.2p1+ after some serious
> se
Quoting Tom Browder (2020-02-12 18:53:09)
> I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
> installed it from Debian packages.
>
> In the process of reading a blog article by the current developer I
> discovered the upstream is now at version 6.6.2p1+ aft
On qua, 12 fev 2020, Tom Browder wrote:
I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
installed it from Debian packages.
In the process of reading a blog article by the current developer I
discovered the upstream is now at version 6.6.2p1+ after some serious
security
On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 11:53 -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
> installed it from Debian packages.
>
> In the process of reading a blog article by the current developer I
> discovered the upstream is now at version 6.6.
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:53:09AM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD
>
> I would like to install from source but I wonder if that is such a
> smart move, especially when we now use systemd and the source is set
> up with the traditional GNU automake system and I
I started looking in to use of OpenSMPTD for a mail server and have
installed it from Debian packages.
In the process of reading a blog article by the current developer I
discovered the upstream is now at version 6.6.2p1+ after some serious
security issues were discovered by SSL Labs (Qualys
> Is there any advantage, in terms of privacy, to download Debian
> packages
> over the Tor network?
>
> Are you doing it yourself, and if yes, for what reason(s)?
>
> Is using the Tor transport better than a standard http proxy (e.g.
> privoxy → tor) ?
>
> Thanks
On 3/28/19 9:17 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> No. Because the least Google track is your IP address. It is true that
> Tor is meant to obscure your IP address, but "trackers", in your use
> of the word, are mostly Javascript code snippets (sometimes invisible
> images and things like that) made to
On 3/28/19, André Rodier wrote:
> On 2019-03-28 16:12, John Hasler wrote:
>> tomas writes:
>>> No. Because the least Google track is your IP address. It is true that
>>> Tor is meant to obscure your IP address, but "trackers", in your use
>>> of the word, are mostly Javascript code snippets (somet
tomas writes:
> No. Because the least Google track is your IP address. It is true that
> Tor is meant to obscure your IP address, but "trackers", in your use
> of the word, are mostly Javascript code snippets (sometimes invisible
> images and things like that) made to convince your browser to betra
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:27:08AM -0600, ghe wrote:
> On 3/28/19 1:18 AM, André Rodier wrote:
>
> > Is there any advantage, in terms of privacy, to download Debian packages
> > over the Tor network?
>
> Tor's job is to keep the trackers away by bouncing your pack
On 3/28/19 1:18 AM, André Rodier wrote:
> Is there any advantage, in terms of privacy, to download Debian packages
> over the Tor network?
Tor's job is to keep the trackers away by bouncing your packets around
so Google starts tracking the wrong IP address. But the last hop is in
th
On 10/07/2017 06:48 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
Fred wrote:
I have a Sun Ultra 5 that needs to continue running Wheezy for a
while. I tried to apt-update but binary_sparc is no longer at
http://security.debian.org/dists/wheezy/updates/Release. What do I
need to change the sources list to?
Debian
Fred wrote:
> I have a Sun Ultra 5 that needs to continue running Wheezy for a
> while. I tried to apt-update but binary_sparc is no longer at
> http://security.debian.org/dists/wheezy/updates/Release. What do I
> need to change the sources list to?
Debian Wheezy LTS is only available for i386
Hello,
I have a Sun Ultra 5 that needs to continue running Wheezy for a while.
I tried to apt-update but binary_sparc is no longer at
http://security.debian.org/dists/wheezy/updates/Release. What do I need
to change the sources list to?
Best regards,
Fred
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:08:34AM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 at 10:25:33 +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > Not a readymade solution [...]
> It does, and Debian Policy says it must. That information ends up in
> /usr/share/doc
On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 at 10:25:33 +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Not a readymade solution, but perhaps a lead to follow: package copyright
> info is supposed to be in a file debian/copyright within the package source
> archive[1]. I don't know at the moment whether this info percolates to
> the pac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 04:05:49PM +0800, Yanhao Mo wrote:
[...]
> Nothing, I was just curious. :P
Not a readymade solution, but perhaps a lead to follow: package copyright
info is supposed to be in a file debian/copyright within the package source
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 02:32:36PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Yanhao Mo wrote:
>
> > but what I really want to know is that is there such a list that display
> > all debian packages with their licenses, just like the following link
> > abou
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Yanhao Mo wrote:
> but what I really want to know is that is there such a list that display
> all debian packages with their licenses, just like the following link
> about rhel[1].
There is no single list of licenses for each Debian package,
just the i
Hi,
I do known how to find license info about packages those have been
installed on my system and how to generate a list about it.
but what I really want to know is that is there such a list that display
all debian packages with their licenses, just like the following link
about rhel[1].
[1
On 10/27/2014 10:20 PM, Martinx - ジェームズ
wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I would like to evaluate both `eudev` (or any other *udev), plus
> `uselessd`, on Debian sid/testing.
>
> Lets do it?!
>
> I' m planning to achieve, at least, "CGroups Process" with `uselessd`
> (no init scripts).
I would strong
Le 28.10.2014 14:34, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
Andrei's reply has lots of useful stuff in it, I just had two things
to add:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:20:24AM -0200, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
If things goes well, I think that `uselessd + new udev` might be a
good path to follow, mostly becaus
stop doing that, they have
to support sysvinit scripts for the forseeable future.
Secondly, if you want to discuss creating Debian packages, please use
debian-ment...@lists.debian.org and not debian-user@ for that.
Thanks,
--
Jonathan Dowland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@l
Le 28.10.2014 03:20, Martinx - ジェームズ a écrit :
Hey guys,
I would like to evaluate both `eudev` (or any other *udev), plus
`uselessd`, on Debian sid/testing.
Lets do it?!
I' m planning to achieve, at least, "CGroups Process" with
`uselessd`
(no init scripts).
If things goes well, I thi
On Ma, 28 oct 14, 00:20:24, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
>
> I would like to evaluate both `eudev` (or any other *udev), plus
> `uselessd`, on Debian sid/testing.
There's already a Request For Package (RFP) bug[1] against the wnpp[2]
pseudo-package, you might want to post your progress there. I'd sug
Hey guys,
I would like to evaluate both `eudev` (or any other *udev), plus
`uselessd`, on Debian sid/testing.
Lets do it?!
I' m planning to achieve, at least, "CGroups Process" with `uselessd`
(no init scripts).
If things goes well, I think that `uselessd + new udev` might be a
good path to
Hi,
I am planning to install OpenNebula 4.6 on Debian 7 to be used with GlusterFS
storage servers. In the documentation of OpenNebula 4.6 one care read the
following:
"The hypervisor nodes need to be part of a working GlusterFS cluster and the
Libvirt and QEMU packages need to be recent enough
On 06/12/13 19:27, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
> Thanks, Scott. See my notes interlineated below…
Thanks, I appreciate the feedback/testing.
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Scott Ferguson
> wrote:
>
>> On 06/12/13 13:30, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
>
>
>>> There was some recent discussion on the me
Thanks, Scott. See my notes interlineated below…
On Dec 5, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Scott Ferguson
wrote:
> On 06/12/13 13:30, Rick Thomas wrote:
>>
>> Thanks to all who replied. I got lots of useful suggestions.
>>
>> The one that finally got me off the ground is this one… Somehow I
>> missed
On 06/12/13 13:30, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
> Thanks to all who replied. I got lots of useful suggestions.
>
> The one that finally got me off the ground is this one… Somehow I
> missed it in all my googling.
:)
It didn't exist when you did your Googling. I wrote it *after* reading
your post.
>
Thanks to all who replied. I got lots of useful suggestions.
The one that finally got me off the ground is this one… Somehow I missed it in
all my googling.
https://wiki.debian.org/WordPress
By *carefully* following *all* the instructions there, I was able to get a
functioning WordPres
On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:38 AM, Scott Ferguson
wrote:
>> Hi Rick,
>>
>> These instructions should work for Debian as well:
>> http://movingtofreedom.org/2007/05/09/how-to-wordpress-on-ubuntu-gnu-linux/
>>
>> The main thing is to get Apache & PHP configured properly. Once that's
>> done, Wordpre
On 27/11/13 19:21, Kailash wrote:
> On Sunday 24 November 2013 07:09 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
>>
>> Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
>> sudo aptitude install wordpress
>> on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working wordpress
>> website on th
On Sunday 24 November 2013 07:09 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
> Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
> sudo aptitude install wordpress
> on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working wordpress
> website on the same machine?
>
> I've read the READ
On 25/11/13 12:10, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 25/11/13 10:13, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
>> Rick Thomas wrote:
>>> Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
>>> sudo aptitude install wordpress
>>> on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working
>>> wordpress
On 25/11/13 10:13, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Rick Thomas wrote:
>> Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
>> sudo aptitude install wordpress
>> on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working
>> wordpress website on the same machine?
>>
>> I've read th
--- Begin Message ---
Rick Thomas wrote:
Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
sudo aptitude install wordpress
on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working wordpress
website on the same machine?
I've read the README.Debian in /usr/share/
Rick Thomas wrote:
Can someone point me at step-by-step instructions for going from
sudo aptitude install wordpress
on a freshly scrubbed, newly installed Wheezy system to a working wordpress
website on the same machine?
I've read the README.Debian in /usr/share/doc/wordpress/ and the s
I'd avoid the packages. Wordpress is basically a bunch of php scripts
that get dumped inside a directory on your Apache server, plus some
setup for your database. You're a lot safer just downloading the zip
file and following the instructions. At least, that's how I've always
had the best lu
Thanks, Sharon!
That's good advice if all I want is wordpress. But I'm a sysadmin, and like to
understand the details. So, for the time being, I'd prefer to do it from
scratch if I can.
If I succeed (with help from the list) I promise to write up the step-by-step
procedure for the wiki, so t
1 - 100 of 644 matches
Mail list logo
