Hi Shawn,
this sounds like a bug in the cloud images.
Not quite sure, why they need the netdev (system) group, but if that
user is created by them, they should do so as a system user.
Could you please inform the cloud image maintainers?
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Cloud
https://salsa.debian
Hi everyone, trying to figure out if this is a bug or just a misunderstanding.
I’m attempting to install Gnome on the generic cloud init image of Debian 12
using the package task-gnome-desktop and it’s failing because on the cloud
images the netdev group is created with a GID > 999. This causes
Hi everyone, trying to figure out if this is a bug or just a misunderstanding.
I’m attempting to install Gnome on the generic cloud init image of Debian 12
using the package task-gnome-desktop and it’s failing because on the cloud
images the netdev group is created with a GID > 999. This causes
Thanks again for all your help. Once again, at this point, I don't remember
how I did it, but I cleared the sources list and put in the Debian
repository to download Gnome. It's taking me a lot of effort to wield the
code since I'm new at this, and I don't want to cause irreparable damage.
Be well!
Thanks to all you for your help! I followed your advice partially and was able
to install Gnome. I don’t understand how it worked and I plan to try to figure
that out tomorrow. Bedankt!
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 6, 2020, at 6:51 PM, Tom Dial wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 6/6/20 09:14, leonard mori
On 6/6/20 09:14, leonard morin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope all are well. I recently dual-installed debian from a live image
> on a usb along with Windows on a new computer. My friend gave me some
> guidance, but he is very busy so I don't want to bother him now.
>
> When I first installed, my w
Marc Shapiro schreef op 2020-06-06 20:30:
On 6/6/20 8:58 AM, Brad Rogers wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:14:13 -0400
leonard morin wrote:
Hello leonard,
Line commented out by installer because it failed to verify:
Both instances of that should either be deleted or have an #
inserted at
the s
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:30:05 -0700
Marc Shapiro wrote:
Hello Marc,
>/etc/apt/sources.list file, he is not using the CDs, either. Those
>lines were also commented out.
Oops. You are indeed correct - the line wrapping(1) confused me. Thanks
for pointing it out.
(1) May not be the same as you s
On 6/6/20 8:58 AM, Brad Rogers wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:14:13 -0400
leonard morin wrote:
Hello leonard,
Line commented out by installer because it failed to verify:
Both instances of that should either be deleted or have an # inserted at
the start of the line. IMO, the former is prefera
leonard morin schreef op 2020-06-06 17:14:
Hello,
I hope all are well. I recently dual-installed debian from a live
image on a usb along with Windows on a new computer. My friend gave me
some guidance, but he is very busy so I don't want to bother him now.
When I first installed, my wifi didn't
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:14:13 -0400
leonard morin wrote:
Hello leonard,
> Line commented out by installer because it failed to verify:
Both instances of that should either be deleted or have an # inserted at
the start of the line. IMO, the former is preferable.
You may also wish to add an onlin
Hello,
I hope all are well. I recently dual-installed debian from a live image on
a usb along with Windows on a new computer. My friend gave me some
guidance, but he is very busy so I don't want to bother him now.
When I first installed, my wifi didn't work on Debian, so I couldn't
download Gnome
Csanyi Pal writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to install on my Debian GNU/Linux SID the
> gnome-keyring-manager package:
> http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome-keyring-manager
>
> but can't find it:
> aptitude search gnome-keyring-manager gives me no result.
> How could be that that I can't find this
Hi,
I'm trying to install on my Debian GNU/Linux SID the
gnome-keyring-manager package:
http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome-keyring-manager
but can't find it:
aptitude search gnome-keyring-manager gives me no result.
My sources.list has the following lines:
deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian
Am 17.03.2010 09:05, schrieb Mark Allums:
> Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
> Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse
> to update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that
> will not be a viable option.
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:37:38 +0100
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2010-03-20 21:57:24 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > Well, a quick search seems to indicate that some DEs already have this,
> > e.g. Gnome, with its /etc/gnome/defaults.lst. I guess you want
> > something that's DE independent.
>
> But ev
On 2010-03-20 21:57:24 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> Well, a quick search seems to indicate that some DEs already have this,
> e.g. Gnome, with its /etc/gnome/defaults.lst. I guess you want
> something that's DE independent.
But even under GNOME, one may use non-GNOME applications (e.g. Mutt),
which wo
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:15:40PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2010-03-18 05:13:33 -0500, Mark Allums wrote:
> > My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work;
> > some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at
> > the same time. Which is actually run
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:19:54 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-20 21:06, Andrew Winnenberg wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500
> >> Ron Johnson wrote:
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF
On 2010-03-20 21:06, Andrew Winnenberg wrote:
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
...
For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC,
XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt,
gentoo
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC,
>> XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt,
>> gentoo or any of a dozen other file mana
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
...
> For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC,
> XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt,
> gentoo or any of a dozen other file managers.
>
> There should be a freedesktop standard for file
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:55:02PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> > And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy. I think it's more that MSO
> > is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ &
> > Java.
> >
>
> Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget wh
On 2010-03-19 14:20, Celejar wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:39:49 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
...
XFce only allows the user to choose MUA or browser. Win XP allows
the user to make all sorts of user-specific application choices.
A lot of this stuff is really probably better handled at the indi
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:39:49 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
...
> XFce only allows the user to choose MUA or browser. Win XP allows
> the user to make all sorts of user-specific application choices.
A lot of this stuff is really probably better handled at the individual
application level. For exam
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work;
>>> some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at the
>>> same time. Which is actually running, I am not competent enough to
>>> know.
>
>> update
On 2010-03-19 06:31, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Fri,19.Mar.10, 11:53:28, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so
update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so
The choice should really be made at the level of indivi
On Fri,19.Mar.10, 11:53:28, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so
> > > update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so
> >
> > The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther
> > than
On 2010-03-19 05:53, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so
update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so
The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther
than system-wide.
Yes, I complet
On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so
> > update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so
>
> The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther
> than system-wide.
Yes, I completely agree. BTW, this is not specif
>> My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work;
>> some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at
>> the same time. Which is actually running, I am not competent enough
>> to know.
> update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so
> update-alternatives --c
On 2010-03-18 19:04, Kelly Clowers wrote:
[snip]
MSO (all versions) is almost entirely C++, like most MS programs and
Win32 itself. Most of the very low-level stuff (including the NT Kernel) is
in C.
C++ had barely been invented when Word, Excel & Access were written,
and the compilers and l
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 20:55, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy. I think it's more that MSO
>> is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ &
>> Java.
>>
>
> Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but
> it's
On 2010-03-18 15:55, Dotan Cohen wrote:
And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy. I think it's more that MSO
is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ &
Java.
Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but
it's not .NET. They do that
On 3/18/2010 3:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-03-18 11:47, Sjoerd Hiemstra wrote:
Andrei Popescu:
Ron Johnson:
Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc,
Write, FF & Tbird.
That's too bad.
The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded
in Wind
> And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy. I think it's more that MSO
> is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ &
> Java.
>
Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but
it's not .NET. They do that because there are a lot of bugs, and
On 2010-03-18 11:47, Sjoerd Hiemstra wrote:
Andrei Popescu:
Ron Johnson:
Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc,
Write, FF & Tbird.
That's too bad.
The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded
in Windows.
And yet me getting-old laptop is s
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrei Popescu [mailto:andreimpope...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 18 March, 2010 00:42
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does
> installing gnome ...)
>
> On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:
On 3/18/2010 11:39 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
The order of installation seems to matter. Installing Gnash, and then
(re-)installing Flash caused most embedded videos to play properly. I
have not tried Flash-based UIs, like Flash games.
To put the nail in the coffin of this, after a lot of experimen
>> > Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc,
>> > Write, FF & Tbird.
>>
>> That's too bad.
>
> The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded
> in Windows.
>
For one thing, you can preload in Linux as well. For users with 2GB
RAM or more, I enable th
Andrei Popescu:
> Ron Johnson:
> > Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc,
> > Write, FF & Tbird.
>
> That's too bad.
The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded
in Windows.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
wit
On 3/18/2010 5:13 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/17/2010 10:40 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
that each user on the machine can choose which fl
On 3/18/2010 8:15 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2010-03-18 05:13:33 -0500, Mark Allums wrote:
My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work;
some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at
the same time. Which is actually running, I am not competent enough
On 2010-03-18 05:13:33 -0500, Mark Allums wrote:
> My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work;
> some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at
> the same time. Which is actually running, I am not competent enough
> to know.
update-alternatives --display
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:10:55 +0200
Dotan Cohen wrote:
> > So apparently the stuff could actually be included in the official
> > archive, without violating the social contract?
> >
>
> No, there is a difference between checking all software for possible
> patent infringement and including known
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:18:13 +0200
Dotan Cohen wrote:
...
> Thanks, Celejar. I also gave up on Lyx for Hebrew, but I may start
> filing issues on the Lyx 2.0 branch so that they could fix it in time
> for release. There does seem to be effort in that regard.
>
> It would be great if you could w
> Hm, I've had sort of the opposite experience. Hebrew stuff usually
> works fine for me with OO, but I've reluctantly had to give up LyX for
> mixed Hebrew / English document creation, due to its brokenness:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=516017
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:19:07 +0200
Micha wrote:
...
> The problem is collaboration. There are quite a few word documents that don't
> open properly in open office (hebrew usually typesets wrong, math doesn't
> work
> at all ...)
>
> Powerpoint files are also a complete mess in openoffice.
>
> So apparently the stuff could actually be included in the official
> archive, without violating the social contract?
>
No, there is a difference between checking all software for possible
patent infringement and including known offenders. But the line is
grey, to be sure.
--
Dotan Cohen
http
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:28:49 +0200
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Wed,17.Mar.10, 16:44:17, Ron Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free
> > tree, and Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
> > http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
>
> Most of the stuf
>>>
>>>
But can a "purist" accept such support and be a true linux user?
>>>
>>> "Linux" is not synonymous with "free". "Debian" is not synonymous with
>>> "Stallman". Please keep these facts in mind.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Sure . . . I was just curious to get some particular responses from users.
>>
On 3/18/2010 5:13 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/17/2010 10:40 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
that each user on the machine can choose which fl
On 3/18/2010 6:35 AM, Neal Hogan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/17/2010 9:03 PM, Neal Hogan wrote:
Most (if not all) software has some sort of license, like "use as
you'd like but make sure you tell the next person the same" (BSD . .
.as I understand it). Howe
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 3/17/2010 9:03 PM, Neal Hogan wrote:
>
>> Most (if not all) software has some sort of license, like "use as
>> you'd like but make sure you tell the next person the same" (BSD . .
>> .as I understand it). However, Flash is not just a set of
On 3/17/2010 9:23 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
1
But I'm just pragmatic enough that I want it to work.
If there was a reliable, stable, free flash plugin, I'd use it. But
there's just too many flash sequences that the free stuff can't handle
properly. At least not yet. If web sites didn't use thi
On 3/17/2010 9:03 PM, Neal Hogan wrote:
Most (if not all) software has some sort of license, like "use as
you'd like but make sure you tell the next person the same" (BSD . .
.as I understand it). However, Flash is not just a set of words . . .
to use Adobe software without paying for it is stea
2010/3/18 Micha :
> There are quite a few word documents that
> don't open properly in open office (hebrew usually typesets wrong, math
> doesn't work at all ...)
>
Please comment on this issue:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=105270
--
Dotan Cohen
http://bido.com
http://what-is
On 3/17/2010 10:40 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
that each user on the machine can choose which flash player she wants
to use.
My initial
On 2010-03-18 03:41, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:28:40, Ron Johnson wrote:
The main problem is all the 3rd party applications written
specifically for Word and Excel which have no analog in the OOo
world.
Interesting, I didn't come across such things in my company
A
On 3/17/2010 2:08 PM, Mike Castle wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse to
update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will
On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:28:40, Ron Johnson wrote:
> The main problem is all the 3rd party applications written
> specifically for Word and Excel which have no analog in the OOo
> world.
Interesting, I didn't come across such things in my company
> Also is the tight integration w/ other MS
On 2010-03-18 02:41, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:07:12, Dotan Cohen wrote:
Therefore, I have no problem with proprietary Flash, even though I
understand the problems that it causes. I wish that more proprietary
software, such as Solidworks and MS Office, were available for Debia
On 18/03/2010 09:41, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:07:12, Dotan Cohen wrote:
Therefore, I have no problem with proprietary Flash, even though I
understand the problems that it causes. I wish that more proprietary
software, such as Solidworks and MS Office, were available for Debian
On Wed,17.Mar.10, 22:23:24, Stephen Powell wrote:
> I can only speak for myself. I am a Linux user and system administrator.
> I am not a Debian package maintainer or Debian developer. I *STRONGLY*
> prefer free (as in freedom and as in price) software over non-free
> software. But I'm just pr
On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:07:12, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Therefore, I have no problem with proprietary Flash, even though I
> understand the problems that it causes. I wish that more proprietary
> software, such as Solidworks and MS Office, were available for Debian
> or Linux in general.
Is there any r
On Wed,17.Mar.10, 16:44:17, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free
> tree, and Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
> http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
Most of the stuff there is DFSG-free, but infringes some patents.
Regards,
Andrei
--
Of
On 2010-03-17 21:03, Neal Hogan wrote:
[snip]
Most (if not all) software has some sort of license, like "use as
you'd like but make sure you tell the next person the same" (BSD . .
.as I understand it). However, Flash is not just a set of words . . .
to use Adobe software without paying for it i
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Neal Hogan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
>>
>> Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free tree, and
>> Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
>> http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
>>
>
> "non-free?" I know
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:35:25 -0400 (EDT), Neal Hogan wrote:
> I highly suspect a flame-war here, but isn't against the
> "Stallmanian-principle" for a linux machines to play with those
> proprietary kids AT ALL. That is, debian (or any other linux) should
> not even consider talking with that kind
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free tree, and
> Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
> http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
>
"non-free?" I know that's what it's called, but I wonder how descriptive it is.
B
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Reid wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 March 2010 20:15:51 Neal Hogan wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> > Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free tree,
>> > and Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
>> >
On Wednesday 17 March 2010 20:15:51 Neal Hogan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Enough DDs are sufficiently practical for there to be a non-free tree,
> > and Christian Marillat does yeoman's work with
> > http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
>
>
>
> Ok . . . that's
> I highly suspect a flame-war here, but isn't against the
> "Stallmanian-principle" for a linux machines to play with those
> proprietary kids AT ALL. That is, debian (or any other linux) should
> not even consider talking with that kind of software. I'm just curious
> how many linux users/devs/et
>
The rub is that Debian doesn't officially know that Flash exists. Even if
it
did, too many DDs are morally opposed to closed-source to want to Depend
on
it.
>>>
>>> I highly suspect a flame-war here, but isn't against the
>>> "Stallmanian-principle" for a linux machin
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-17 16:35, Neal Hogan wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Ron Johnson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
> Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that
On 2010-03-17 16:35, Neal Hogan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>
>>> Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
>>
>> That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
>> There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
>> that each user on the
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:19:35 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>
>> That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
>> There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
>> that each user on the machine can choose which flash pl
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:19:35 -0500
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
> >
> > That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
> > There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
> > that each user on
On 2010-03-17 10:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
that each user on the machine can choose which flash player she wants
to use.
The rub is t
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
> Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
> Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse to
> update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that will
> not be a viable
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
>
>
> Current Squeeze.
>
>
> eog
> gedit
> gnome-applets
> gnome-control-center
> gnome-icon-theme
> gnome-menus
> gnome-panel
> gnome-power-manager
> gnome-session
> gnome-settings-daemon
> gnome-terminal
> gvfs
> metacity
> mutter
> nautilus
> yelp
>
> suggests
> Installing Gnash screws up Flash.
That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed.
There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so
that each user on the machine can choose which flash player she wants
to use.
Stefan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user
On 3/17/2010 7:51 AM, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
the case on Lenny:
I it was introduced into squeeze yesterday (source package meta-gnome2
2.28+6 transitioned to squeeze on 2010-03-16). The reason seems to be
that swfdec was
On 3/17/2010 6:48 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/17/2010 4:42 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
Why does GNOME require Gnash? And what can I do to put a stop to it?
Look at the following metapackages, their descriptions and dependen
On 2010-03-17 08:31, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
Mark could always just remove gnome. It's just a metapackage.
Yes again. But depending on how the gnome metapackage was installed,
removing it can also remove its dependents. Installing one of the lesser
met
On 2010-03-17, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
> Liam O'Toole skrev:
>> On 2010-03-17, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
the case on Lenny:
>>>
>>> I it was introduced into squeeze yesterday (source package meta-gnome2
>>> 2.28+6 tra
Liam O'Toole skrev:
On 2010-03-17, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
the case on Lenny:
I it was introduced into squeeze yesterday (source package meta-gnome2
2.28+6 transitioned to squeeze on 2010-03-16). The reason seems to be
On 2010-03-17, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-03-17 06:48, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
>> the case on Lenny:
>>
>> $ apt-cache depends gnome-core
>> gnome-core
>> Depends: gnome-control-center
>> Depends: eog
>> Depends: gedi
On 2010-03-17, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
>> I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
>> the case on Lenny:
>
>
> I it was introduced into squeeze yesterday (source package meta-gnome2
> 2.28+6 transitioned to squeeze on 2010-03-16). The reason seems to be
> that swfd
I'm surprised to hear that gnome-core requires gnash. It's certainly not
the case on Lenny:
I it was introduced into squeeze yesterday (source package meta-gnome2
2.28+6 transitioned to squeeze on 2010-03-16). The reason seems to be
that swfdec was removed. The changelog[0] for meta-gnome2 sa
On 2010-03-17 06:48, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/17/2010 4:42 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
Why does GNOME require Gnash? And what can I do to put a stop to it?
Look at the following metapackages, their descriptions and dependencie
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 3/17/2010 4:42 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
>>> Why does GNOME require Gnash? And what can I do to put a stop to it?
>>
>> Look at the following metapackages, their descriptions and dependencies:
>>
>> gnome
>> gnom
Oddly, for some reason, they all require Gnash. I'm rooting for Gnash, I
hope Gnash works out in the end, and with HTML5 video tag, maybe it
will,
What I said up there was badly put. What I mean is I hope that Flash
and Gnash and Silverlight and Moonlight will become obsolete, at least
as f
On 3/17/2010 4:42 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
Why does GNOME require Gnash? And what can I do to put a stop to it?
Look at the following metapackages, their descriptions and dependencies:
gnome
gnome-desktop-environment
gnome-core
Choose the one
On 2010-03-17, Mark Allums wrote:
> Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
> Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse
> to update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that
> will not be a viable option. Why d
On 2010-03-17 03:05, Mark Allums wrote:
Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse
to update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that
will not be a viable option. Why doe
Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is
Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse
to update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that
will not be a viable option. Why does GNOME require Gnash? And what
can I d
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 11:36 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 10:06:09 +0100, michael wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 10:43 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 23:18:50 +0100, michael wrote:
>
> [ snip: problems inst
On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 10:06:09 +0100, michael wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 10:43 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 23:18:50 +0100, michael wrote:
[ snip: problems installing Gnome on unstable ]
> > > python-gnome2-desktop: Depends: libwnck18
> &g
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
