Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

Am 09.12.24 um 20:30 schrieb Paul Scott: > I have never been completely clear about the format for sources.list. > > Can someone tell what to add to sources.list to get mozillavpn (sid) Mozilla VPN is based on Mullvad VPN. Mullvad is cheaper and provides Debian packages.

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

Hi, On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 11:26:52PM +0100, Jean-François Bachelet wrote: > Le 10/12/2024 à 19:41, Andy Smith a écrit : > > According to: > > > > > > https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-install-mozilla-vpn-linux-computer > > > > they only support Ubuntu. > no. > > read at the botto

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

Hello :) Le 10/12/2024 à 19:41, Andy Smith a écrit : Hi, On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 12:30:01PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: Can someone tell what to add to sources.list to get mozillavpn (sid) I think you would be better off asking Mozilla how to install software they make, as this is not packaged

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 21:56:32 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > I did see "debports" (not "backports") on > https://packages.debian.org/sid/mozillavpn I also see a link to . If I click that, I am taken to a page that says, among other things, Save 50% on Mozilla VP

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 01:08:09PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: > On 12/10/24 11:41 AM, Andy Smith wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 12:30:01PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: > > > Can someone tell what to add to sources.list to get mozillavpn (sid) > > I think you would be better off asking Mo

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 01:08:09PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: > https://packages.debian.org/sid/mozillavpn shows the packages listed > as backports Sid doesn't have backports. What I see at that page is that there are *unofficial* builds of mozillavpn, but only on riscv64 and ia64. What architectur

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

On Tue 10 Dec 2024 at 13:08:09 (-0700), Paul Scott wrote: > https://packages.debian.org/sid/mozillavpn shows the packages listed > as backports I saw those, but they appear to be for rather unusual architectures, and I thought you'd have mentioned that. Cheers, David.

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

Andy, Thank you for your reply. https://packages.debian.org/sid/mozillavpn shows the packages listed as backports Paul On 12/10/24 11:41 AM, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 12:30:01PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: Can someone tell what to add to sources.list to get mozillavpn (si

Re: sources.list for Mozilla VPN

Hi, On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 12:30:01PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: > Can someone tell what to add to sources.list to get mozillavpn (sid) I think you would be better off asking Mozilla how to install software they make, as this is not packaged by or provided by Debian. According to: https://su

Re: sources.list 's security line

On 08.09.21 21:12, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 08:28:18PM +0200, Ulf Volmer wrote: >> On 08.09.21 16:50, Lee wrote: >> >>> Are you using a dnssec validating resolver? >>> >>> It'd be nice of somebody that understands dnssec would double-check, >>> but it looks like name lookups f

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 08:28:18PM +0200, Ulf Volmer wrote: > On 08.09.21 16:50, Lee wrote: > > > Are you using a dnssec validating resolver? > > > > It'd be nice of somebody that understands dnssec would double-check, > > but it looks like name lookups for security.debian.org has dnssec > > enab

Re: sources.list 's security line

On 08.09.21 16:50, Lee wrote: > Are you using a dnssec validating resolver? > > It'd be nice of somebody that understands dnssec would double-check, > but it looks like name lookups for security.debian.org has dnssec > enabled and not enabled for deb.debian.org deb.debian.org is a CNAME and this

Re: sources.list 's security line

On 9/6/21, Jim Popovitch wrote: [.. snip lots ..] > security.d.o and deb.d.o are both hosted on fastly servers, albeit > different sets of servers. What is interesting to me is that the DNS for > security.d.o is operated by Debian whereas the DNS for deb.d.o is run by > fastly. I'm not sure tha

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:29:19PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: > On September 6, 2021 5:05:45 PM UTC, Steve Dondley wrote: > > On 2021-09-06 05:53 AM, riveravaldez wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > > > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I t

Re: sources.list 's security line

On September 6, 2021 5:05:45 PM UTC, Steve Dondley wrote: > On 2021-09-06 05:53 AM, riveravaldez wrote: > > Hi, > > > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with > > kinda four options for the security line i

Re: sources.list 's security line

On 2021-09-06 05:53 AM, riveravaldez wrote: Hi, after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with kinda four options for the security line in /etc/apt/sources.list Those being: deb http://security.debian.org/debian-sec

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 08:34:44 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] > Also, there's the wee little fact that testing is no longer a synonym > for bullseye, and therefore even if the fourth one *did* work, it > wouldn't be equivalent to the other three. With only http://security.debian.org bullse

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 08:34:44 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 11:42:52AM +0100, Brian wrote: > > On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 06:53:25 -0300, riveravaldez wrote: > > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > > > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm f

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 11:42:52AM +0100, Brian wrote: > On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 06:53:25 -0300, riveravaldez wrote: > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with > > kinda four options for the security line in /

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 11:21:03 +0100, Brian wrote: [...] > I've always thought contrib and non-free as not being supported by > the security team. I think I'll change my mind. The result of self-education follows: :) https://www.debian.org/security/faq#contrib ...If it is possible to fix th

Re: sources.list 's security line

I use de 2n one with no problems. My sources.list: deb http://security.debian.org/ stable-security main non-free contrib deb http://security.debian.org/ oldstable/updates main non-free contrib Since in http://security.debian.org/dists/stable-security/ there is non-free floder, I keep it in my so

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 06:53:25 -0300, riveravaldez wrote: > Hi, > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with > kinda four options for the security line in /etc/apt/sources.list > Those being: > > deb http://s

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon 06 Sep 2021 at 10:08:28 +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 06:53:25AM -0300, riveravaldez wrote: > > Hi, > > > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with > > kinda four options

Re: sources.list 's security line

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 06:53:25AM -0300, riveravaldez wrote: > Hi, > > after reading the various sources of documentation (handbook, > wiki, FAQs, Release Notes, etc.) I think I'm finding myself with > kinda four options for the security line in /etc/apt/sources.list > Those being: > > deb http:

Re: sources.list for security

Greg Wooledge wrote: ... > If you are running "eternal testing" (you never convert it to a stable > release), then you HAVE NO security support. None. There is no line > you should use for security, because there isn't any security. false. security updates come via unstable uploads that migra

Re: sources.list for security

Andrei POPESCU wrote: ... > 'testing' receives security updates via 'unstable', there is no separate=20 > repository. > > https://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing ok, thanks! :) i am fine with that. i had an old line in the sources.list that no longer was useful. got rid of that, clean

Re: sources.list for security

> >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/931785 Which says "security suite renamed to bullseye-security (from buster/updates)". On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 05:44:44PM -0400, songbird wrote: > >> wishlist for an alias to testing so nobody who=20 > >> follows testing will need to keep changing their > >> so

Re: sources.list for security

On Du, 05 iul 20, 19:31:54, songbird wrote: > > i want the line that goes into the /etc/apt/sources.list > file for testing security updates. 'testing' receives security updates via 'unstable', there is no separate repository. https://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing Kind regards, Andrei

Re: sources.list for security

On 6/7/20 9:31 am, songbird wrote: some time ago there was a change made to the sources list names for security and i never saw the one for testing come by (i may have missed it) so i'm asking...:) Good afternoon This is what my sources.list looked like when I first installed testing ear

Re: sources.list for security

Dan Ritter wrote: > songbird wrote: >> Andrei POPESCU wrote: ... >> >> wishlist for an alias to testing so nobody who=20 >> >> follows testing will need to keep changing their >> >> sources.list every time there is a release. >> > >> > What more than the 'testing' alias are you looking for? >>

Re: sources.list for security

songbird wrote: > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:38:05, songbird wrote: > >> Andrei POPESCU wrote: > >> > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:52:25, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > >> >>=3D20 > >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/931785 > >> > > >> > Oups, completely forgot about that, even though I'm su

Re: sources.list for security

Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:38:05, songbird wrote: >> Andrei POPESCU wrote: >> > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:52:25, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: >> >>=3D20 >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/931785 >> > >> > Oups, completely forgot about that, even though I'm subscribed to -doc. >>=20 >> wish

Re: sources.list for security

On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:38:05, songbird wrote: > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:52:25, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > >>=20 > >> https://bugs.debian.org/931785 > > > > Oups, completely forgot about that, even though I'm subscribed to -doc. > > wishlist for an alias to testing so nobo

Re: sources.list for security

Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:52:25, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: >>=20 >> https://bugs.debian.org/931785 > > Oups, completely forgot about that, even though I'm subscribed to -doc. > > Kind regards, > Andrei wishlist for an alias to testing so nobody who follows testing will need

Re: sources.list for security

On Du, 05 iul 20, 09:52:25, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > https://bugs.debian.org/931785 Oups, completely forgot about that, even though I'm subscribed to -doc. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: sources.list for security

hi, On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 10:34:30AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Du, 05 iul 20, 08:14:28, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > > hi, > > > > I found several proposals for thre security entry > > > > deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main contrib non-free > > deb http://security.debian.o

Re: sources.list for security

On Du, 05 iul 20, 08:14:28, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > hi, > > I found several proposals for thre security entry > > deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main contrib non-free > deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib > non-free [fixed wrapping] > deb

Re: sources.list for security

Am 05. Jul, 2020 schwätzte Pierre Frenkiel so: moin moin Pierre, I found several proposals for thre security entry deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free deb http://deb.debian.or

Re: sources.list for security

On 7/5/2020 8:14 AM, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: hi, I found several proposals for thre security entry deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ b

Re: sources.list

Il 19/10/2017 18:12, don magnify ha scritto: thanks...  i did. same result... You may want to run # apt-get update before your build-dep command.

Re: sources.list

Il 19/10/2017 19:29, don magnify ha scritto: how dies this help with the "build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing" part?! Because build-dep action needs to download source packages too. Since you plan to install *build* dependencies, you need the sources (or at least headers) of the required

Re: sources.list

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Richard Hector wrote: > On 20/10/17 05:12, don magnify wrote: > > thanks... i did. same result... is there any particular src endpoint > > directly affecting the "build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing" > > commands/flags? > > > > thanks... > > > > On Thu, Oct 1

Re: sources.list

On 20/10/17 05:12, don magnify wrote: > thanks...  i did. same result...  is there any particular src endpoint > directly affecting the "build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing" > commands/flags? > > thanks...  > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Steve Kemp > wrote: >

Re: sources.list

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Lucio Crusca wrote: > > > Il 19/10/2017 12:00, don magnify ha scritto: > > # sudo apt-get build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing > > > > get: > > > > "E: You must put some 'source' URIs in your sources.list" > > You need to add deb-src lines. > > https://debgen.si

Re: sources.list

thanks... i did. same result... is there any particular src endpoint directly affecting the "build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing" commands/flags? thanks... On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Steve Kemp wrote: > > > >#A sudo vi /etc/apt/sources.list > > > >shows this: > > > >deb

Re: sources.list

> >#A sudo vi /etc/apt/sources.list > >shows this: > >deb http://cdn-aws.deb.debian.org/debian stretch main Lines beginning with "deb" are used for binary packages. For "source" packages you need a "deb-src" prefix. Something like this: deb-src http://cdn-aws.deb.debi

Re: sources.list

Il 19/10/2017 12:00, don magnify ha scritto: > # sudo apt-get build-dep python-imaging --fix-missing > > get: > > "E: You must put some 'source' URIs in your sources.list" You need to add deb-src lines. https://debgen.simplylinux.ch/

Re: Re: Sources.list file for Debian Wheezy

Thanks, Bob. I think I would go for the /*http.debian.net */after reading about it from your supplied link. And for the record, */ or **/ was unintentional and wasn't on my sources.list . Muntasim-Ul-Haque

Message formatting: was Re: Sources.list file for Debian Wheezy

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/01/14 20:47, Bob Proulx wrote: > What is up with the */ and /**/ stuff? The HTML version has it bold and italic. I suspect it's icedove trying to be clever, and use 'formatting' in a 'plain text' format ... Richard -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE

Re: Sources.list file for Debian Wheezy

Muntasim-Ul-Haque wrote: > I use two repositories for Debian Wheezy for the same purpose. One > of them is "HTTP" and another one is "FTP". My two alternatives > sources.list are as follows: > "*/deb http://http.debian.net/debian wheezy main/**/ > /**/deb-src http://http.debian.net/debian wheezy m

Re: Sources.list Question

On Mi, 21 nov 12, 13:22:14, Tom Furie wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 09:18:48AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > > > > Hello List, > > > > > > It is considered (well, a

Re: Sources.list Question

On Mi, 21 nov 12, 09:18:48, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > > Hello List, > > > > It is considered (well, actually it is) rude to hijack threads on > > mailing lists. > > According

Re: Sources.list Question

id (I even did not know that there were ids here, thanks > > for info). > > > > I think people on linux's mailing lists should know that automated things > > are never perfect, and must be taken carefully. > > > > But I do not think it have anything related to &quo

Re: Sources.list Question

7;s mailing lists should know that automated things > are never perfect, and must be taken carefully. > > But I do not think it have anything related to "Re: Sources.list Question". Um, not to pour gasoline on a dying fire, but the OP was told it was rude to hijack another thread. B

Re: Sources.list Question

even did not know that there were ids here, thanks for info). I think people on linux's mailing lists should know that automated things are never perfect, and must be taken carefully. But I do not think it have anything related to "Re: Sources.list Question". -- To UNSUBSC

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 09:18:48AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > > Hello List, > > > > It is considered (well, actually it is) rude to hijack threads on > > mailing lists.

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wednesday 21 November 2012 12:23:00 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > ignore something that's hidden in the headers and > that isn't human readable, something we receive all the times, shouldn't > cause chaos. It doesn't! Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a sub

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 10:52 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 10:39:46 François TOURDE wrote: > > Le 15665ième jour après Epoch, > > > > Ralf Mardorf écrivait: > > > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:27 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > >> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 09:22:57 Ralf Mardor

Re: Sources.list Question

Sorry, Lars. Sent to you in error. Resending to list. I fear that th ethreading may have been broken. I think that my KMail is definitely sickly. :-( On Wednesday 21 November 2012 11:16:09 Lars Noodén wrote: > On 11/21/12, Lisi Reisz wrote: > ... > > > Gmail doesn't even know what a thread

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Lars Noodén wrote: > On 11/21/12, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> >> Gmail doesn't even know what a thread is. It goes purely by subject. > > Is there even any place to report such bugs with their mail client? Possibly https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/to-

Re: Sources.list Question

On 11/21/12, Lisi Reisz wrote: ... > Gmail doesn't even know what a thread is. It goes purely by subject. ... Is there even any place to report such bugs with their mail client? Regards /Lars -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". T

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wednesday 21 November 2012 10:39:46 François TOURDE wrote: > Le 15665ième jour après Epoch, > > Ralf Mardorf écrivait: > > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:27 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 09:22:57 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >> > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:18 +, Lisi Reisz wro

Re: Sources.list Question

Le 15665ième jour après Epoch, Ralf Mardorf écrivait: > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:27 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 09:22:57 Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:18 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> > > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote:

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:27:34 + Lisi Reisz wrote: Hello Lisi, >Quite. Exactly. And Chris said that he hijacked the thread. He did; Crypticmofo's Guide/Tools post. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)radnever immediately apparent" Your fat

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:27 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 09:22:57 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:18 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wednesday 21 November 2012 09:22:57 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:18 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > > > Hello List, > > > > > > It is considered (wel

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:18 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > > Hello List, > > > > It is considered (well, actually it is) rude to hijack threads on > > mailing lists. > > Ac

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wednesday 21 November 2012 08:53:38 Chris Bannister wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > Hello List, > > It is considered (well, actually it is) rude to hijack threads on > mailing lists. According to my email client (KMail 1.9.10) he didn't. What thread did

Re: Sources.list Question

On Wednesday 21 November 2012 03:43:16 Fred White wrote: > I need to upgrade Opendkim version 2.0.1 but squeeze repository remains > with 2.0.1 since I started have to add opendkim to my server and this > version seem never to be upgraded. However, 2.6.8 is in Debian backports > repository and sinc

Re: Sources.list Question

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:43:16PM -0500, Fred White wrote: > > Hello List, > It is considered (well, actually it is) rude to hijack threads on mailing lists. -- "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing

Re: Sources.list Question

There is also the solution of creating a file containing the needed line in /etc/apt/sources.list.d All files here are virtually added to the sources.list file by apt* when updating the package list. Le Mer 21 novembre 2012 5:34, Zenaan Harkness a écrit : > This WFM (works for me): > add the extra

Re: Sources.list Question

On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 22:43 -0500, Fred White wrote: > Hello List, > > I am learning to help myself installing and updates some minor programs > on my dedicated server and need to ask a couple of questions. > > I need to upgrade Opendkim version 2.0.1 but squeeze repository remains > with 2.0.1

Re: Sources.list Question

This WFM (works for me): add the extra dist/section update install package remove the section You will be left with your package. Repeat if you need to upgrade just that package, either by install it again, or by [dist-]upgrade with regular sources.list entries just prior to upgrading for that pac

Re: sources.list configuration

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Balint Szigeti wrote: > On 10/01/2012 18:12, amt wrote: >> >> I did what you said in your reply and it works like a charm. Thank you >> so very much! >> >> > what  was the solution? The solution was adding: deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian squeeze main contrib

Re: sources.list configuration

On 10/01/2012 18:12, amt wrote: I did what you said in your reply and it works like a charm. Thank you so very much! what was the solution? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archiv

Re: sources.list configuration

I did what you said in your reply and it works like a charm. Thank you so very much! -- 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/CAEQEn03W6LXJg=hKG0R9CE08VMR+MTrp

Re: sources.list configuration

On 10/01/2012 17:12, amt wrote: Thanks Balint for the reply but I want to do it using apt-get from the terminal. If it helps, I tried doing apt-get install vlc instead of xchat and it returns me: Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some pac

Re: sources.list configuration

On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:25:40 -0500 amt <0101...@gmail.com> wrote: > Here is my /etc/apt/sources.list: > > # deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD > Binary-1 20$ > > deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD > Binary-1 2011$ > > deb http://securit

Re: sources.list configuration

Thanks Balint for the reply but I want to do it using apt-get from the terminal. If it helps, I tried doing apt-get install vlc instead of xchat and it returns me: Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This

Re: sources.list configuration

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 05:37:35PM +0100, Roel Wagenaar wrote: > amt <0101...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, I have just migrated from a debian based distro to Debian Squeeze > > 6.0.3 amd64 lxde. I want to install xchat on my machine but when I > > do:"apt-get install xchat" in the ro

Re: sources.list configuration

On 10/01/2012 16:58, amt wrote: Here is how the /etc/apt/sources.list is looking now: # # deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD Binary-1 201$ #deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD Binary-1 2011$ deb http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/up

Re: sources.list configuration

Here is how the /etc/apt/sources.list is looking now: # # deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD Binary-1 201$ #deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.3 _Squeeze_ - Official amd64 DVD Binary-1 2011$ deb http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates main contrib deb-src http://

Re: sources.list configuration

amt <0101...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, I have just migrated from a debian based distro to Debian Squeeze > 6.0.3 amd64 lxde. I want to install xchat on my machine but when I > do:"apt-get install xchat" in the root terminal, it returns nothing. > > Here is my /etc/apt/sources

Re: sources.list best practices

Brad Alexander (stor...@gmail.com on 2011-11-16 10:07 -0500): > Actually, Andrei, that will fit puppet well. I was just looking for > methodologies, and I think that you and Tong pointed out a couple of > important points. First, never cross the streams on stable. I'm > guessing here that both of y

Re: sources.list best practices

Actually, Andrei, that will fit puppet well. I was just looking for methodologies, and I think that you and Tong pointed out a couple of important points. First, never cross the streams on stable. I'm guessing here that both of you probably use the codename (e.g. squeeze, lenny, wheezy, etc) and no

Re: sources.list best practices

On Ma, 15 nov 11, 17:58:16, Brad Alexander wrote: > > The third option is to dispense with a sources.list altogether, and put > release-specific .list files in sources.list.d. Of course, you could have > permutations of the above. Did I miss any options? This is what I do now on all machines: (p

Re: sources.list directory specification

On Sunday 04 September 2011 09:06:39 Scott Ferguson wrote: > Just checked, Squeeze doesn't seem to auto-pin Interesting. I must obviously ensure that I keep a copy of my Lenny preferences file! I have not yet installed any backports on Squeeze. I only install backports if and when I have a go

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 04/09/11 17:11, Lisi wrote: On Saturday 03 September 2011 10:35:53 Scott Ferguson wrote: On 03/09/11 08:27, Lisi wrote: So - you are just doing as I suggested. Being selective (except you were doing it long before I suggested it, and I was only echoing the documentation) "Hidden" in my or

Re: sources.list directory specification

On Saturday 03 September 2011 10:35:53 Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 03/09/11 08:27, Lisi wrote: > So - you are just doing as I suggested. Being selective (except you were > doing it long before I suggested it, and I was only echoing the > documentation) > > "Hidden" in my original post was this:- >

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 03/09/11 08:27, Lisi wrote: On Friday 02 September 2011 13:18:00 Scott Ferguson wrote: Enabling those repositories on a constant basis means you have no idea what will come down if you go:- # apt-get update; apt-get upgrade (or dist-upgrade) I have backports permanently enabled, but package

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 03/09/11 00:20, Dejan Ribič wrote: Dne 2.9.2011 14:18, piše Scott Ferguson: On 02/09/11 19:37, Dejan Ribič wrote: Dne 02. 09. 2011 07:19, piše Scott Ferguson: On 02/09/11 03:06, Tom H wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: Hi, You are right in that I have a limited experie

Re: sources.list directory specification

On Friday 02 September 2011 13:18:00 Scott Ferguson wrote: > Enabling those repositories on a constant basis means you have no idea > what will come down if you go:- > # apt-get update; apt-get upgrade (or dist-upgrade) I have backports permanently enabled, but packages are only downloaded if I e

Re: sources.list directory specification

Dne 2.9.2011 14:18, piše Scott Ferguson: On 02/09/11 19:37, Dejan Ribič wrote: Dne 02. 09. 2011 07:19, piše Scott Ferguson: On 02/09/11 03:06, Tom H wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: I'd be cautious about enabling backports, proposed, and, especially, multimedia - except

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 02/09/11 19:37, Dejan Ribič wrote: Dne 02. 09. 2011 07:19, piše Scott Ferguson: On 02/09/11 03:06, Tom H wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: I'd be cautious about enabling backports, proposed, and, especially, multimedia - except on a case-by-case basis (enable when neede

Re: sources.list directory specification

Dne 02. 09. 2011 07:19, piše Scott Ferguson: > On 02/09/11 03:06, Tom H wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: >>> >>> I am trying to compose a sources.list file for each of three machines; >>> one is for Lenny (oldstable), one is for Squeeze (stable), and one is >>> for Wheezy (testing

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 02/09/11 03:06, Tom H wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: I am trying to compose a sources.list file for each of three machines; one is for Lenny (oldstable), one is for Squeeze (stable), and one is for Wheezy (testing). According to "Index of /pub/debian/dists" at http://ftp.pl

Re: sources.list directory specification

> On 2 September 2011 01:13, wrote: > >> I am trying to compose a sources.list file for each of three machines; >> one is for Lenny (oldstable), one is for Squeeze (stable), and one is >> for Wheezy (testing). My thanks to Camaleón, Tom H, and Heddle Weaver for helping me get around this obstacle

Re: sources.list directory specification

On 2 September 2011 01:13, wrote: > I am trying to compose a sources.list file for each of three machines; > one is for Lenny (oldstable), one is for Squeeze (stable), and one is > for Wheezy (testing). > You could just install and run netselect-apt from each machine? Regards, Weaver. -- Re

Re: sources.list directory specification

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: > > I am trying to compose a sources.list file for each of three machines; > one is for Lenny (oldstable), one is for Squeeze (stable), and one is > for Wheezy (testing). > > According to "Index of /pub/debian/dists" at > http://ftp.pl.debian.org/pub/debian

Re: sources.list directory specification

On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 10:13:39 -0500, rlharris wrote: (...) > Which form is correct? is it permissible to use either form? may the > forms be mixed within a single sources.list file? To be in the safe-side, I would stay with the one that matches your "man sources.list". Anyway, there can be rep

  1   2   3   >