Hi.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:31:49PM -0700, ray wrote:
> Reco,
>
> Thank you for the info. Can you suggest how this can help resolve the issue?
Install either grub-efi-amd64 or grub-efi-ia32 (not both, choose one of
these according to UEFI used in the laptop).
Disable BIOS compatibili
Reco,
Thank you for the info. Can you suggest how this can help resolve the issue?
Hi.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 06:41:51PM -0700, ray wrote:
> It is my understanding that UEFI is appropriate for systems with HDD > 2TB.
UEFI has nothing to do with the disk size. GPT, on the other hand, does.
And yes, you can force BIOS to boot from GPT-labeled drive.
Reco
ray composed on 2015-10-19 18:46 (UTC-0700):
> Jude DaShiell composed on 2015-10-19 04:48 (UTC-0400):
>> control-alt-f7 gets you back to graphical mode.
> The system does not respond to cntrl-alt-f7
> Just to clarigy, the system is at the grub prompt in a CSM boot.
> The BIOS has two settings
> control-alt-f7 gets you back to graphical mode. On Sun, 18 Oct 2015, ray
> wrote:
The system does not respond to cntrl-alt-f7
Just to clarigy, the system is at the grub prompt in a CSM boot.
The BIOS has two settings for function key implementation. I have tried this
under both.
It is my understanding that UEFI is appropriate for systems with HDD > 2TB.
control-alt-f7 gets you back to graphical mode. On Sun, 18 Oct 2015, ray
wrote:
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:17:52
From: ray
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Reinstall Stretch - Returns to Grub
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:36:09 + (UTC)
Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 17:17:52 -0700 (PDT), ray wrote:
> I have stretch installed on a Toshiba and I am not able to reinstall it.
> The first instance was installed using the BIOS mode CSM. I want to
> reinstall using UEFI.
Why do you want UEFI? You've got a working installation from CSM.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130602130138.ga27...@telenet.be
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130602130247.ga28...@telenet.be
The NVIDIA proprietary driver blacklists the nouveau driver by creating a file
in /etc/modprobe.d
IIRC the file name is nouveau.conf, but I could be wrong there.
If you want to revert to using nouveau you will have to:
(i) remove that file
(ii) run sudo depmod -a
(iii) rebuild initramfs by runn
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:26:08 -0700
Joe Riel wrote:
> My /etc/default/grub file contained
>
> GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet vga=775"
>
> should I remove the vga=775 when adding
> GRUB_GFXMODE=1280x1024
> GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
Yes! I've been trying different settings and rebooting and
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:26:08 -0700
Joe Riel wrote:
> Alan Ianson writes:
>
> > On Fri, 31 May 2013 12:59:49 -0700
> > Joe Riel wrote:
> >
> >> Alan Ianson writes:
> >>
> >> > On Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:52 -0700
> >> > Joe Riel wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to i
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 07:26:08AM -0700, Joe Riel wrote:
>
> My /etc/default/grub file contained
>
> GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet vga=775"
>
> should I remove the vga=775 when adding
> GRUB_GFXMODE=1280x1024
> GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
I'd say yes, to avoid conflicts, but you could *act
Alan Ianson writes:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 12:59:49 -0700
> Joe Riel wrote:
>
>> Alan Ianson writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:52 -0700
>> > Joe Riel wrote:
>> >
>> >> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver.
>> >> It didn't work (X didn't come up). I manage
On Fri, 31 May 2013 12:59:49 -0700
Joe Riel wrote:
> Alan Ianson writes:
>
> > On Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:52 -0700
> > Joe Riel wrote:
> >
> >> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver.
> >> It didn't work (X didn't come up). I managed to revert to using
> >> the nouv
On Vi, 31 mai 13, 12:59:49, Joe Riel wrote:
>
> Only thing I've noticed that is obviously worse is that the virtual
> terminal font is now big and ugly. I recall that the same occured when
> I previously tried an nvidia driver in Squeeze.
Put something like this in /etc/default/grub and run 'upd
On Fri, 31 May 2013 12:49:36 -0700
Joe Riel wrote:
Hello Joe,
>I tried that, didn't help. Well, I tried dpkg-reconfigure; that
>didn't help.
Try installing nvidia-installer-cleanup, which ensures any remnants of
the packages installed from the nVidia website are removed, and
therefore, cannot
On 2013-05-31 21:49 +0200, Joe Riel wrote:
> Sven Joachim writes:
>
>> Reinstall the xserver-xorg-core and libgl1-mesa-glx packages, those
>> contain files which are overwritten by the Nvidia installer.
>
> I tried that, didn't help. Well, I tried dpkg-reconfigure; that
> didn't help.
Of course
Alan Ianson writes:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:52 -0700
> Joe Riel wrote:
>
>> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver.
>> It didn't work (X didn't come up). I managed to revert to using the
>> nouveau driver, by removing /etc/X11/xorg.conf, which mostly works.
>> Ho
Sven Joachim writes:
> On 2013-05-31 20:13 +0200, Joe Riel wrote:
>
>> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver. It
>> didn't work (X didn't come up).
>
> Using the Nvidia installer is not recommended, better use the packages
> in non-free.
>
>> I managed to revert to u
On Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:52 -0700
Joe Riel wrote:
> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver.
> It didn't work (X didn't come up). I managed to revert to using the
> nouveau driver, by removing /etc/X11/xorg.conf, which mostly works.
> However, I'm having an issue rend
On 2013-05-31 20:13 +0200, Joe Riel wrote:
> After upgrading to Wheezy, I attempted to install an nvidia driver. It
> didn't work (X didn't come up).
Using the Nvidia installer is not recommended, better use the packages
in non-free.
> I managed to revert to using the
> nouveau driver, by remov
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:53:14AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > You already have a root user account. All Unix-like machines will
> > > have a root user superuser account. That is uid 0 on the machine by
> > > definition. All you need to know is the
Bob Proulx wrote:
> So that explains how users are set up to use sudo in that installation
> case. However I haven't looked to see what configures Synaptic to use
> one method or the other for authorizing the user. I will research
> that and report what I learn. It would be good to know about it
Tom H wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > But all released versions of Debian always install both a root account
> > and a normal user account.
> > ...
> > If you install Debian Stable Squeeze you will be asked for a root
> > account and then a normal user account. Debian doesn't install sudo
> > by def
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> But all released versions of Debian always install both a root account
> and a normal user account.
> ...
> If you install Debian Stable Squeeze you will be asked for a root
> account and then a normal user account. Debian doesn't install sudo
Stephen Allen wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > You already have a root user account. All Unix-like machines will
> > have a root user superuser account. That is uid 0 on the machine by
> > definition. All you need to know is the password for it.
>
> Hm OK I understand this if one is doing a conve
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 08:32:47PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
>
> > So I guess perhaps the way forward is to add a root user, install su
> > and remove sudoers?
>
> You already have a root user account. All Unix-like machines will
> have a root user superuser account. That
Stephen Allen wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > I installed a scratch system just now and tested running Synaptic from
> > the default GNOME installation. It definitely wants root's password
> > and not a sudo password.
>
> Right that has got to be the difference. Appreciate the fact that you did
>
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:48:26PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> I don't think the "re" part matters. At this point it is simply an
> install. And the discussion of sudo was just a red herring
> distracting from the real problem. I think the real problem is that
> if you are running Synaptic fro
Stephen Allen wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Are you running Synaptic through sudo? Or is it asking you for the
> > password itself? I never run Synaptic. But I use sudo a lot.
>
> It works fine using sudo from CLI that's no problem. The only issue
> is when run from the menu; the password prom
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 11:00:29PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > Just to follow-up to my previous email, Bob's suggestion didn't work
> > either. That stanza was already entered.
>
> Are you running Synaptic through sudo? Or is it asking you for the
> password itself? I nev
Stephen Allen wrote:
> Just to follow-up to my previous email, Bob's suggestion didn't work
> either. That stanza was already entered.
Are you running Synaptic through sudo? Or is it asking you for the
password itself? I never run Synaptic. But I use sudo a lot.
What is the output of sudo -l?
Just to follow-up to my previous email, Bob's suggestion didn't work either.
That stanza was already entered.
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.or
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 10:32:03PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> darkestkhan wrote:
> > Stephen Allen wrote:
> > > Unfortuantely the suggested fix didn't work.
>
> Just recently a new sudo entered Wheezy Testing and it changed the
> behavior of secure_path. See Bug#639841 for details. But it means
darkestkhan wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > Unfortuantely the suggested fix didn't work.
Just recently a new sudo entered Wheezy Testing and it changed the
behavior of secure_path. See Bug#639841 for details. But it means
that you need to add this line too:
Defaults
secure_path="/usr/local
2011/9/4 Stephen Allen :
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:04:20AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
>> 2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
>> > On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:32:00AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
>
>> >> /etc/sudoers contains informations about who has rights to access root
>> >> level privileges (though I know
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:04:20AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
> 2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
> > On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:32:00AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
> >> /etc/sudoers contains informations about who has rights to access root
> >> level privileges (though I know it can do much more, like giving
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:03:38AM +0100, Joe wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 19:48:33 -0400
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > Cool. Thanks for the help.
> >
> > Strange why that line isn't there aye?
> >
> >
>
> Sudo in sid has just been updated to a version with a different
> sudoers file format. Those
2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:32:00AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
>> 2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
>
>> > It contains just 2 fields;
>> >
>> > # User privilege specification
>> > root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
>> >
>> > # Allow members of group sudo to execute any c
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 19:48:33 -0400
Stephen Allen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:32:00AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
> > 2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
>
> > > It contains just 2 fields;
> > >
> > > # User privilege specification
> > > root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
> > >
> > > # Allo
On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:32:00AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
> 2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
> > It contains just 2 fields;
> >
> > # User privilege specification
> > root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
> >
> > # Allow members of group sudo to execute any command
> > %sudo ALL=(ALL:
2011/9/3 Stephen Allen :
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 05:32:03AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
>> 2011/9/1 Stephen Allen :
>> > Hello.
>
>> > What do I have to do to fix this?
>
>>
>> check out /etc/sudoers if it contains all fields
> ---end quoted text---
>
> It contains just 2 fields;
>
> # User
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 05:32:03AM +, darkestkhan wrote:
> 2011/9/1 Stephen Allen :
> > Hello.
> > What do I have to do to fix this?
>
> check out /etc/sudoers if it contains all fields
---end quoted text---
It contains just 2 fields;
# User privilege specification
root
2011/9/1 Stephen Allen :
> Hello.
>
> For various reasons, needed to reinstall Debian Testing (Wheezy) on a flash
> drive formatted into 2 partitions. A system partition and one for HOME.
>
> Since the install I'm no longer able to use Synaptic with my password (I
> enabled sudo in the Installer)
On Fri,18.Sep.09, 12:44:14, postid wrote:
> I have an older machine (Dell Optiplex GS150) that needs more hard
> drive space. I have some nonoperational hand-me-down computers from
> which I can rob a drive. If I keep the original as the master and
> add one of these used drives as a slave,
If pos
On 0, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:27:51PM +0100, Thomas Kenyon wrote:
> > I am in the process of recovering from having a very damaged filesystem.
> >
> > Is there a method using either dpkg or apt/aptitude to get packages to
> > refresh their files?
> >
> > The packages i
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:27:51PM +0100, Thomas Kenyon wrote:
> I am in the process of recovering from having a very damaged filesystem.
>
> Is there a method using either dpkg or apt/aptitude to get packages to
> refresh their files?
>
> The packages installed are up to date so I can't upgrade
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 08:23:06PM -0400, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard
to say:
Tod Detre wrote:
A less drastic approach, which would not risk breaking anything, would be
"apt-get install --reinstall $pkg" in place of the last two steps. I don't
know if it would a
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 08:23:06PM -0400, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard
to say:
> Tod Detre wrote:
> A less drastic approach, which would not risk breaking anything, would be
> "apt-get install --reinstall $pkg" in place of the last two steps. I don't
> know if it would accomplish the sam
Tod Detre wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I do I force files to be overwritten in aptitude ?
Like apt-get --purge remove && apt-get install , but
in aptitude.
Re-installing in aptitude doesn't overwrite modified files. Is there an
option ?
This isn't in aptitude, but it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I do I force files to be overwritten in aptitude ?
> Like apt-get --purge remove && apt-get install , but
> in aptitude.
> Re-installing in aptitude doesn't overwrite modified files. Is there an
> option ?
This isn't in aptitude, but it might work.
> Patrick Sannes wrote:
> >Hell there,
> >
> >I have had a huge system crash, and recoverd partionaly from it. But a
> >part of the stuff is damaged. Now I want to reinstall all the installed
> >packages. Can I do that. Then the system is working again after a night
> >of downloads.
I wonder, i
Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:30:24PM -0700, dfoley wrote:
Patrick Sannes wrote:
Hell there,
I have had a huge system crash, and recoverd partionaly from it. But a
part of the stuff is damaged. Now I want to reinstall all the installed
packages. Can I do that. Then the syst
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:30:24PM -0700, dfoley wrote:
> Patrick Sannes wrote:
>> Hell there,
>> I have had a huge system crash, and recoverd partionaly from it. But a
>> part of the stuff is damaged. Now I want to reinstall all the installed
>> packages. Can I do that. Then the system is workin
Patrick Sannes wrote:
Hell there,
I have had a huge system crash, and recoverd partionaly from it. But a
part of the stuff is damaged. Now I want to reinstall all the installed
packages. Can I do that. Then the system is working again after a night
of downloads.
Thanks
Patrick Sannes
I
On 05/15/2007 05:36 PM, Seb wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 22:30:26 +0100,
> Liam O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Haven't seen that one before. Any clues in /var/log/cups/error_log?
- ->--^^^!
> Nada; just after gettin
On Tue, 15 May 2007 22:30:26 +0100,
Liam O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Haven't seen that one before. Any clues in /var/log/cups/error_log?
Nada; just after getting the error:
,-[ sudo tail /var/log/messages ]
| May 15 13:27:25 patagonia -- MARK --
| May 15 13:47:25 patagonia --
On Tue, 15 May 2007 16:24:30 -0500
Seb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 22:05:12 +0100,
> Liam O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Try 'apt-get --purge --reinstall install cupsys'. Failing that,
> > 'apt-get --purge remove cupsys && apt-get install cupsys' should d
On Tue, 15 May 2007 22:05:12 +0100,
Liam O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Try 'apt-get --purge --reinstall install cupsys'. Failing that, 'apt-get
> --purge remove cupsys && apt-get install cupsys' should do it.
The latter worked, although now I'm getting:
"413 request entity too larg
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:20:03 -0500
Seb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I messed up my cupsd config file and would like to reinstall it, but
> doing 'apt-get --reinstall install cupsys' nor 'dpkg-reconfigure
> cupsys' seem to reinstall this configuration file. How can this file
> be reinstal
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:50:24PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> I would just do a purge, remove any vestigial files in /etc and then
> install it again fresh.
Ah, but I don't want to do that. I want to be prompted, with all the
same options that aptitude usually provides when upgrading a packa
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:50:24PM -0400, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> >Doing "aptitide reinstall foo" doesn't seem to reinstall the
> >maintainer's configuration files. What do I need to do to have the
> >system ask me if I want to use the modified version or the package
> >mai
Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
Doing "aptitide reinstall foo" doesn't seem to reinstall the
maintainer's configuration files. What do I need to do to have the
system ask me if I want to use the modified version or the package
maintainer's version?
I would just do a purge, remove any vestigial files in
I just tried mkboot, and put it in me little book. :o)
It works on sarge with grub installed, but it doesn't work on lm9 with lilo
installed.
ken
-Original Message-
From: Hendrik Boom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 September 2005 1:51pm
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subjec
hi ya hendrik
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > > boot = /dev/fd0
> > > root = /dev/hda1
>
> Poor choice of language. Yes. It boots the MBR on the floppy,
> then tries to read the kernel, the initrd, and such from /dev/hda1.
yup..
> But if the drive has been physically moved t
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:26:22PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> > > vi lilo.conf
> > > boot = /dev/fd0
> > >
> > > root = /dev/hda1
> >
> > Won't that make it boot from /dev/hda1?
>
> no... it boots from floppy ( the MBR )
Poor choice of languag
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > vi lilo.conf
> > boot = /dev/fd0
> >
> > root = /dev/hda1
>
> Won't that make it boot from /dev/hda1?
no... it boots from floppy ( the MBR )
it's told that /, /dev, /etc, /bin etc ( rootfs ) is on /dev/hda1
> How will it know to look on
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 06:31:00AM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> > mkboot only works if you have lilo installed.
>
> those commands and gazillion other equivalent/similarly
> named commands all have assumptions in order to work
And boy, is it confusing if you don't know what the assumptions are!
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > > I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
to wipe out the mbr
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda bs=448 count=1
aka: fdisk /mbr
aka: reformat/reinstalling :-)
to install the mbr
dd if=working-mbr of=/dev/hda
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 06:32:39AM -0400, Hugh Lawson wrote:
> Rakotomandimby Mihamina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> > I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
> > I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
>
> If you have a floppy drive, one of these shou
I do not have idea why this very useful option is removed from sarge.
Now i always need 2 cd's, sarge and woody with xfs.
In my opinion it's the worst change from woody to sarge.
Full rescue support was not integrated into d-i by the time sarge was
released.
The latest Installers have a res
If you have Woody install cd you can run it with:
rescue root=/dev/hdaX
and when system is up make:
# lilo
that's it.
I do not have idea why this very useful option is removed from sarge.
Now i always need 2 cd's, sarge and woody with xfs.
In my opinion it's the worst change from woody to sarg
Rakotomandimby Mihamina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
> I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
If you have a floppy drive, one of these should work:
use 'mkboot' to make a boot floppy (easiest). Be sure to test be
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 04:39:22PM +0200, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
> Hi,
> I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
> I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
>
> That lilo loads three linux installation at the moment (one Debian, one
> Mandriva and one Fedor
Angelo Bertolli wrote:
I think the moral of the story is: use GRUB. Is there any advantage to
using LILO these days?
I know how to use it. serious advantage. ;)
A
Angelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTE
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
seems to me that windows has problems with this. it really only wants
to be first partition on the first harddrive. I strongly recommend
that you put windows on its own HD, or on the first partition of a
second HD. you can remap the drives in lilo so that windows d
Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
Hi,
I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
That lilo loads three linux installation at the moment (one Debian, one
Mandriva and one Fedora). They are respectively an hda1 to hda3. Lilo's
Maurits van Rees wrote:
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 04:39:22PM +0200, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
(...)
The partition for the windows OS is ready and empty. It's hda4
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 04:39:22PM +0200, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
> I will have to reinstall my windows XP because I messed it up.
> I know it will fire my bootloader (lilo on the MBR)
>
(...)
> The partition for the windows OS is ready and empty. It's hda4
I wonder if Windows knows that i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I have not long perched a second hand computer witch has windows 98
> on it and my partner has wiped of the cd rom drive by accident and i
> cannot get it back now. How do i get it back could you tell me in
> English becaus
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:27:44 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have not long perched a second hand computer witch has windows 98 on it
> and my partner has wiped of the cd rom drive by accident and i cannot get it
> back now. How do i get it back could you tell me in English
Ar Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:27:44 EDT, scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have not long perched a second hand computer witch has windows 98
on it and my partner has wiped of the cd rom drive by accident and
i cannot get it back now. How do i get it back could you tell me in
English because i don't underst
If I understand correctly
what you are saying:-
Maybe if the CDROM drive is not connected
properly. Shut down the computer; remove power connection; open the lid and
then remove the connections going to CDROM(one is power and another is called
data-cable) and then connect them again.
Op di 09-09-2003, om 23:56 schreef Benedict Verheyen:
> Op di 09-09-2003, om 22:21 schreef Benedict Verheyen:
> > Hi,
> >
> > after dpkg became unworkable, i reinstalled my server.
> > I encountered a couple of very annoying problems after upgrading to
> > testing and that's with an almost bare sy
Op di 09-09-2003, om 22:21 schreef Benedict Verheyen:
> Hi,
>
> after dpkg became unworkable, i reinstalled my server.
> I encountered a couple of very annoying problems after upgrading to
> testing and that's with an almost bare system!
> (console problem and logger problem where there before upg
on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:30:20AM +0200, Philipp Leusmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> due to a harddisk-failure many files were corrupted. Far too many to
> reinstall them manually.
> Is there a way to reinstall all installed packages? something like 'apt-get
> intall --reinstall *'?
Ye
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 10:30, Philipp Leusmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> due to a harddisk-failure many files were corrupted. Far too many to
> reinstall them manually.
> Is there a way to reinstall all installed packages? something like 'apt-get
> intall --reinstall *'?
If you can get aptitude to run
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 21:01:12 -0400
Rick Pasotto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Today I reinstalled my system and have lost several programs and am
> having troubles with others. This is to be expected but I'd like to know
> how to resolve them.
>
> 1) I used to be able to type 'bug ' at the comman
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 09:01:12PM -0400, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> 1) I used to be able to type 'bug ' at the command line and an
> email would be composed listing the characteristics of my system and the
> installed dependencies for the package. I could then add an explanation
> and the email would b
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 11:15:59PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 04:28:46PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
> > Is there some way to get apt to re-download and re-install ALL
> > packages installed on the system? I am not looking for an upgrade,
> > but a reinstall. Should I just writ
On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 08:15, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 04:28:46PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
> > Is there some way to get apt to re-download and re-install ALL
> > packages installed on the system? I am not looking for an upgrade,
> > but a reinstall. Should I just write some script
On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 04:28:46PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
> Is there some way to get apt to re-download and re-install ALL
> packages installed on the system? I am not looking for an upgrade,
> but a reinstall. Should I just write some script to get a list of
> installed packages and xargs them t
Salut,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 03:13:26AM -0500, hanasaki wrote:
> is there a command that will reconfigure exim to run as a daemon instead
> of from inetd?
Take a look at /usr/share/doc/exim/README.Debian.gz:
--> README.Debian.gz <--
exim for DEBIAN
---
Exim will install by
On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 03:13:26AM -0500, hanasaki wrote:
> is there a command that will reconfigure exim to run as a daemon instead
> of from inetd?
1. Comment out the entry in /etc/inetd.conf for exim.
2. $ /etc/init.d/inetd reload
3. $ /etc/init.d/exim start
The exim start-up script checks if
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 11:59:15PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have lost several files due to an fs inconsistency on ext2 fs, I would
> therefore like to just reinstall certain packages, to replace the lost files.
> Is there an easy was how this can be done? I checked the dpkg man
* On 05-07-01 at 00:18 Moritz Schulte ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
+Here quoted text begins+
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I have lost several files due to an fs inconsistency on ext2 fs, I
> > would therefore like to just reinstall certain packages, to replace
> > the lost files. Is th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I have lost several files due to an fs inconsistency on ext2 fs, I
> would therefore like to just reinstall certain packages, to replace
> the lost files. Is there an easy was how this can be done? I
> checked the dpkg man page and did not find anything like reinstall.
FAWCTK...
Having heard nothing from the list about this I continued on with my upgrade
from Potato_r0 into Woody using the archived deb's on hand. After that
upgrade, the modules suddenly were properly detected.
The only difference between the modules of 2.4 and 2.2 that I can detect is
the use
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
