one of the files uploaded to http://backports.debian.org/squeeze/ failed
gpg verification and aptitude on this end is not updating its files. An
incoming directory separate from repository directories might be useful if
at least one person administers that repository that way they could check
Hi !
Since the migration from XF86 to Xorg I had trouble with my screens.
My hw config is as follows :
1 Radeon 7000 VE.
2 Flat panels.
With some work i've been able to get a 3200x1200 virtual desktop but
my second screen remains black. I meani, everything seems to work just
fin
Derrick Hudson wrote:
| >
| > ... and I thought MS products would stop sucking as soon as they started
| > making vacuums.
|
| Is that a reference only us greybeards would understand? ;)
It's a play on the word "suck". If software sucks, its bad. If a
vacuum sucks, it is working.
-D
You co
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 08:02:21PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
| On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 19:49 +, Stephen Patterson wrote:
| > Jude DaShiell wrote:
| > > I hope you're writing about an excellent Microsoft heavy duty Shop Vac,
| > > because otherwise excellent and Microsoft never get that close in
|
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 19:49 +, Stephen Patterson wrote:
> Jude DaShiell wrote:
> > I hope you're writing about an excellent Microsoft heavy duty Shop Vac,
> > because otherwise excellent and Microsoft never get that close in
> > reality otherwise.
>
> ... and I thought MS products would stop s
According to Stephen Patterson,
> Jude DaShiell wrote:
> > I hope you're writing about an excellent Microsoft heavy duty Shop Vac,
> > because otherwise excellent and Microsoft never get that close in
> > reality otherwise.
>
> ... and I thought MS products would stop sucking as soon as they start
Jude DaShiell wrote:
> I hope you're writing about an excellent Microsoft heavy duty Shop Vac,
> because otherwise excellent and Microsoft never get that close in
> reality otherwise.
... and I thought MS products would stop sucking as soon as they started
making vacuums.
--
Stephen Patterson [
I hope you're writing about an excellent Microsoft heavy duty Shop Vac,
because otherwise excellent and Microsoft never get that close in reality
otherwise.
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Guy Koehler wrote:
Will someone please forward me the original document? Thanks. I
inadvertently deleted it before rea
Hi,
Finally I solved *all* the problems I had with gdm with:
apt-get --purge remove gdm
(it said it didn't remove /etc/dm/)
rm -rf /etc/dm/ (so that everything is removed)
apt-get install gdm
And now it works fine!
Cheers,
Sylvain.
On Wednesday 14 April 2004 19:21, you wrote:
Hi,
try a dpkg-reconfigure gdm
then take a look at the /etc/dm/Sessions directory.
you'll find a file default.desktop. Add one file per desktop/WM you want
to be launched using gdm.
Each file has to be in this form:
[Desktop Entry]
Name=Gnome / KDE / WMaker
Comment=Gnome / kde /Wmaker
Exec=/usr
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Hello,
>
> => Can any of you send me a default/example Xsession file?
> => And also tell me where it should be located to work?
>
> I broke my gdm configuration 3 days ago
> with an apt-get upgrade (SID) + various attempts I made.
>
> I'll avoid stupid attempts nex
Hello,
=> Can any of you send me a default/example Xsession file?
=> And also tell me where it should be located to work?
I broke my gdm configuration 3 days ago
with an apt-get upgrade (SID) + various attempts I made.
I'll avoid stupid attempts next time
(such as removing a file/directory wit
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:22:35AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 12:44:40AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 10:52:12PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > > "Mark L. Kahnt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > I've heard a couple times that the reason that gdm2
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 12:44:40AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 10:52:12PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > "Mark L. Kahnt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I've heard a couple times that the reason that gdm2 is not in Sid is
> > > that it doesn't as yet build on all platforms.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 10:52:12PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> "Mark L. Kahnt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 11:28, David Z Maze wrote:
> >> arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > But I do notice that gdm is back to the gnome1.4 version. And the font
> >> >
"Mark L. Kahnt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 11:28, David Z Maze wrote:
>> arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > But I do notice that gdm is back to the gnome1.4 version. And the font
>> > become very ugly.
>>
>> The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 01:05:14PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 03:51:38PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 11:28:26AM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> > > The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think the GNOME 2.x gdm
> > > is there at all. (Not entirel
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 03:51:38PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 11:28:26AM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> > The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think the GNOME 2.x gdm
> > is there at all. (Not entirely sure why, though.) There are a few
> > bugs against the gdm package
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 11:28:26AM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > But I do notice that gdm is back to the gnome1.4 version. And the font
> > become very ugly.
>
> The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think the GNOME 2.x gdm
> is there at all. (
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 11:28, David Z Maze wrote:
> arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > But I do notice that gdm is back to the gnome1.4 version. And the font
> > become very ugly.
>
> The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think the GNOME 2.x gdm
> is there at all. (Not entirely
arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dear all.
>
>
> Thanks for the clues on GNOME2.
>
> But before I read the emails, I've already tried the ported GNOME2 for
> woody.
>
>
> It was working great.
> Until the time, I felt, It's the wrong thing. I should do it from the
> official place. A
arief_mulya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But I do notice that gdm is back to the gnome1.4 version. And the font
> become very ugly.
The gdm is sid is the GNOME 1.4 gdm; I don't think the GNOME 2.x gdm
is there at all. (Not entirely sure why, though.) There are a few
bugs against the gdm packag
arief_mulya wrote:
But the funny thing is, dselect only shows me gnome 1.4.
Just a dumb question, have you updated available packages info in
dselect? Correct me if I am wrong, doing it with apt-get update doesn't
automatically update packages info in dselect. You got to update the
packages in
Dear all.
Thanks for the clues on GNOME2.
But before I read the emails, I've already tried the ported
GNOME2 for woody.
It was working great.
Until the time, I felt, It's the wrong thing. I should do it
from the official place. And so I apt-get remove gnome (all
the thing I previously install
ok! I called 911!! they will be there shortly!!!
--- Johan Groth
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Moritz Schulte wrote:
> >
> > Johan Groth
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> >
> > > So now I got an unstable :-) system which
> is not so good I think. So what
> > > would happen if I change unstable t
Johan Groth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>'Someone call 911 and tell them' my computer has 'been shot down'...
>... (wonder if anyone recognize the song) because I, my dumb ass, changed a
>line in /etc/apt/sources.list from stable to unstable instead of testing and
>to top it of course I had to do ap
Moritz Schulte wrote:
>
> Johan Groth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So now I got an unstable :-) system which is not so good I think. So what
> > would happen if I change unstable to testing and do apt-get update; apt-get
> > dist-upgrade again?
>
> IMHO nothing. At least the APT in Potato d
Johan Groth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So now I got an unstable :-) system which is not so good I think. So what
> would happen if I change unstable to testing and do apt-get update; apt-get
> dist-upgrade again?
IMHO nothing. At least the APT in Potato doesn't seem to do
downgrades. Does this
'Someone call 911 and tell them' my computer has 'been shot down'...
... (wonder if anyone recognize the song) because I, my dumb ass, changed a
line in /etc/apt/sources.list from stable to unstable instead of testing and
to top it of course I had to do apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade (why
ca
I think you have to replace the 'table=' line in the red
stanza with root=/dev/hda5 and be sure to mount /dev/hda5
before you run lilo.
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:02 +0600 (BDT), Satyajit Das said:
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Leen Besselink wrote:
>
>
> > > My problem is now
On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Leen Besselink wrote:
> > My problem is now I'm not able to boot Red Hat linux.
> > please help me how can I solve this problem, waiting reply urgently
> > because I have so many important files and email.
>
> Until we figure out what happend, maybe someone has had the
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 12:31:09PM +0600, Satyajit Das wrote:
> I have 6.4GB Harddisk.
> Hda1 --- > Win98 ( 1800 MB)
> Hda5 --- > RedHat 6.1 Kernel : 2.2.12-20 (1700MB)
> Hda6 --- > Swap (133MB)
> Hda7 --- > Storm Linux -2000 (2510 MB)
>
> Firstly I install Win98 > next RedHat 6.1 > at last Stor
On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Satyajit Das wrote:
> My problem is now I'm not able to boot Red Hat linux.
>
> please help me how can I solve this problem, waiting reply urgently
> because I have so many important files and email.
Until we figure out what happend, maybe someone has had the same probl
I have 6.4GB Harddisk.
Hda1 --- > Win98 ( 1800 MB)
Hda5 --- > RedHat 6.1 Kernel : 2.2.12-20 (1700MB)
Hda6 --- > Swap (133MB)
Hda7 --- > Storm Linux -2000 (2510 MB)
Firstly I install Win98 > next RedHat 6.1 > at last Storm Linux.
My problem is now I'm not able to boot Red Hat linux.
only boot wi
Robert Thrall wrote:
>
> I have the deluxe Mandrake OS of Linux installed this week on my
> computer. But, none of the command references from the readme files
> work in the root or user modes. I can type in all the commands I want,
> but I keep getting no access to such files. For instance, I
I have the deluxe Mandrake OS of Linux installed this week on my
computer. But, none of the command references from the readme files
work in the root or user modes. I can type in all the commands I want,
but I keep getting no access to such files. For instance, I would lie
to install the Star Of
Holy smoke! I didn't know one could get that much into a Subject
header!!!
--
__ _
Mark Wagnon Debian GNU/ -o) / / (_)__ __ __
Chula Vista, CA /\\/ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v/_/_//_/\_
>hello there, (please forgive my poor English)
Hi Damiaan
No need, Your English is very good. I don't know anything about your
cdrom, but I do have allot Of experience with bad disks. Try A
different disk and redownload resc1440.bin and rawrite it again it may
have gotten corrupted ( con
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 01:38:50AM +0200, damiaan wrote:
> hello there, (please forgive my poor English)
Your English, especially the spelling, seems much better
than a lot of Americans I know :-) If only we in the States
had such a good grasp of foreign languages as you Europeans do :-)
> I tri
hello there, (please forgive my poor English)
I've got an interesting case for you linux wizzkids...
I tried to install Debian 2.1 and now i can't boot from hard disk and
floppy, or reinstall the system:
I tried to install Debian 2.1 on a 486 with floppies.I managed to boot
from hard disk, and s
Hey everyone,
I just returned from a week vacation and after being assured that
everything worked fine in my absence, I find that's not the case
regarding debian.midco.net.
I don't know how out of shape the mirror is, but it's probably not
up-to-date. I'll try to get it there ASAP. The machine
On Wed, Nov 04, 1998 at 12:09:54PM +0100, Roberto Ripio wrote:
> El Wed, 04 Nov 1998, Chad A. Adlawan escribió:
> > http://www.opensource.org/halloween.html
Very interesting. I can't believe they describe Gimp 1.0 as Paintbrush.
At least they weren't stupid enough to say nasty things about Pe
El Wed, 04 Nov 1998, Chad A. Adlawan escribió:
>Hi everyone ! Anyway, i glanced on this one from David Ranch's page
>and some of you might be intersted in reading it.
>
>
>This is an excellent doc that was leaked out of MS on the future
>issue of O
Hi everyone ! Anyway, i glanced on this one from David Ranch's page
and some of you might be intersted in reading it.
Cheers,
Chad
This is an excellent doc that was leaked out of MS on the future
issue of Open Source OSes like Linux, etc. The hos
44 matches
Mail list logo
