On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 02:36:43PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 16 oct 12, 14:00:10, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > $ aptitude search ~Astable | wc -l
> > 43004
> > $ aptitude search ~Astable~scontrib | wc -l
> > 271
> > $ aptitude search ~Astable~snon-free | wc -l
> > 583
>
> Oups, 'stabl
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:30:41AM +0100, Lisi wrote:
> Hello, all!
> I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am clearly
> using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in sundry different
> ways.
>
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are avail
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Andrei POPESCU
wrote:
> On Ma, 16 oct 12, 08:01:59, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Darac Marjal
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> According to my reading of the manual:
>>>
>>> aptitude search '~smain'
>>> and
>>> aptitude search '~smain|~scontrib|~snon-free'
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 19:22:22, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> No, compiling shouldn't be needed. This is a discussion we very often
> had on jack mailing list, when split packages failed.
> I don't know why an app should crash, as long as it doesn't try to
> access the missing lib. It might crash, I don't k
On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 20:10 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 16 oct 12, 18:44:20, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > >
> > > Why should every application *capable* of outputting to jackd force one
> > > to install jackd?
> >
> > Jackd could be a "suggested dependency", if you don't use jackd, why
> >
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 18:44:20, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >
> > Why should every application *capable* of outputting to jackd force one
> > to install jackd?
>
> Jackd could be a "suggested dependency", if you don't use jackd, why
> should the app link against the lib? The app should link against it, a
On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 18:56 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 16 oct 12, 17:34:19, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > FWIW tons of packages doesn't mean tons of apps etc., since of the
> > strange policy to split some packages in an insane way, e.g. the jackd
> > packages are split really insane. Or does
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 17:34:19, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> FWIW tons of packages doesn't mean tons of apps etc., since of the
> strange policy to split some packages in an insane way, e.g. the jackd
> packages are split really insane. Or does any package depend to libjack
> without jackd? And if so, why?
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 08:01:59, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Darac Marjal
> wrote:
> >
> > According to my reading of the manual:
> >
> > aptitude search '~smain'
> > and
> > aptitude search '~smain|~scontrib|~snon-free'
> >
> > should give you the answers you seek, however, I see
FWIW tons of packages doesn't mean tons of apps etc., since of the
strange policy to split some packages in an insane way, e.g. the jackd
packages are split really insane. Or does any package depend to libjack
without jackd? And if so, why?
There often is the argument that shared libs will keep a
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:59:21 +0100
Brian wrote:
>
> Without the faffing about with getting a root prompt and using an
> editor:
>
> cat /var/lib/dpkg/available | grep '^Section:' | wc -l
> cat /var/lib/dpkg/available | grep '^Section: non-free' | wc -l
> cat /var/lib/dpkg/available | grep '^Sec
On Tuesday 16 October 2012 13:59:21 Brian wrote:
> On Tue 16 Oct 2012 at 12:06:17 +0100, Lisi wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 October 2012 11:55:55 Brian wrote:
> > > Edit your /etc/apt/sources.list to have only the line
> > >
> > >deb squeeze non-free
> > >
> > > Then
> > >
> > >apt-get update
>
On Tue 16 Oct 2012 at 12:06:17 +0100, Lisi wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 October 2012 11:55:55 Brian wrote:
> >
> > Edit your /etc/apt/sources.list to have only the line
> >
> >deb squeeze non-free
> >
> > Then
> >
> >apt-get update
> >
> > and look at the output.
> >
> > Add "contrib" to the li
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Darac Marjal wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 08:01:59AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Darac Marjal
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > According to my reading of the manual:
>> >
>> > aptitude search '~smain'
>> > and
>> > aptitude search '~smain|~sco
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 08:01:59AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Darac Marjal
> wrote:
> >
> > According to my reading of the manual:
> >
> > aptitude search '~smain'
> > and
> > aptitude search '~smain|~scontrib|~snon-free'
> >
> > should give you the answers you seek,
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Darac Marjal wrote:
>
> According to my reading of the manual:
>
> aptitude search '~smain'
> and
> aptitude search '~smain|~scontrib|~snon-free'
>
> should give you the answers you seek, however, I seem to get 0 for the
> first and only 626 for the second, so my
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 14:00:10, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> $ aptitude search ~Astable | wc -l
> 43004
> $ aptitude search ~Astable~scontrib | wc -l
> 271
> $ aptitude search ~Astable~snon-free | wc -l
> 583
Oups, 'stable' will also match 'unstable', so the correct search (also
excluding non-Debian sou
On Tuesday 16 October 2012 11:55:55 Brian wrote:
> On Tue 16 Oct 2012 at 11:30:41 +0100, Lisi wrote:
> > I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am
> > clearly using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in
> > sundry different ways.
> >
> > Approximately,
On Tuesday 16 October 2012 11:46:01 Titanus Eramius wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:30:41 +0100
>
> Lisi wrote:
> > Hello, all!
> > I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am
> > clearly using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in
> > sundry different way
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 11:56:34, Jon Dowland wrote:
> This can be answered (by a developer) using UDD -
> http://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase
>
> The answer today is
>
> udd=> select count(*),release from public.packages group by release;
> count | release
> +
On 16/10/12 11:30, Lisi wrote:
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in Debian
> (Squeeze?)
>
>From doing:
for i in main contrib non-free; do echo $i:; curl -s
ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/$i/binary-amd64/Packages.bz2 |
bunzip2 -c | grep Package: | sort -u |
On Ma, 16 oct 12, 11:30:41, Lisi wrote:
> Hello, all!
> I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am clearly
> using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in sundry different
> ways.
>
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in Debian
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:46:01PM +0200, Titanus Eramius wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:30:41 +0100
> Lisi wrote:
>
> > Hello, all!
> > I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am
> > clearly using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in
> > sundry differ
This can be answered (by a developer) using UDD -
http://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase
The answer today is
udd=> select count(*),release from public.packages group by release;
count | release
+--
2 | wheezy-security
272170 | whee
On Tue 16 Oct 2012 at 11:30:41 +0100, Lisi wrote:
> I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am clearly
> using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in sundry different
> ways.
>
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in Debian
>
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:30:41 +0100
Lisi wrote:
> Hello, all!
> I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am
> clearly using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in
> sundry different ways.
>
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in
On Tuesday 16 October 2012 11:30:41 Lisi wrote:
> Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in Debian
> (Squeeze?)
> 1. in main
> 2. in main, contrib and non-free
many, not may :-(
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
Hello, all!
I have searched Wikipedia and the Debian wiki. I have Googled. I am clearly
using the wrong search terms, although I tried rewording in sundry different
ways.
Approximately, in round terms, how may packages are available in Debian
(Squeeze?)
1. in main
2. in main, contrib and non-
28 matches
Mail list logo
