On Sun, 23 Mar 2014, quixote wrote:
> *How* did you do the downgrade? I downloaded
> gthumb_3.2.6-1_amd64.deb, tried to install with gdebi, and got the
> error message:
>
> Dependency is not satisfiable: gthumb-data (= 3:3.2.6-1)
>
> So I downloaded that, put it in the same dir, and got the same
On 23/03/14 05:24 PM, quixote wrote:
*How* did you do the downgrade? I downloaded gthumb_3.2.6-1_amd64.deb,
tried to install with gdebi, and got the error message:
Dependency is not satisfiable: gthumb-data (= 3:3.2.6-1)
So I downloaded that, put it in the same dir, and got the same error
messa
*How* did you do the downgrade? I downloaded gthumb_3.2.6-1_amd64.deb,
tried to install with gdebi, and got the error message:
Dependency is not satisfiable: gthumb-data (= 3:3.2.6-1)
So I downloaded that, put it in the same dir, and got the same error
message.
The new interface is the absol
On 08/03/14 02:02 PM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 13:52:23 -0500
Frank McCormick wrote:
I would like to downgrade Gthumb to the previous version before
the interface was changed. I am running Sid.
I've looked around but the only version available seems to
be the current one 3.3.1
P
Hi.
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 13:52:23 -0500
Frank McCormick wrote:
> I would like to downgrade Gthumb to the previous version before
> the interface was changed. I am running Sid.
> I've looked around but the only version available seems to
> be the current one 3.3.1
Please choose one of those:
ht
On Tuesday 16 of November 2010 22:31:20 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <201011161438.54964.jesus.nava...@undominio.net>, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
> >Downgrade shouldn't be considered as an "upgrade, only to a lower version"
>
> That is what a downgrade is, by definition.
In my case, this whoul
In <201011161438.54964.jesus.nava...@undominio.net>, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
>Hi, Boyd:
>
>On Monday 15 November 2010 20:55:58 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> In <201011151334.06503.lukas.linh...@centrumholdings.com>, Lukas Linhart
>
>[...]
>
>> Downgrades aren't supported and can't reasonably be
Hi, Boyd:
On Monday 15 November 2010 20:55:58 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <201011151334.06503.lukas.linh...@centrumholdings.com>, Lukas Linhart
[...]
> Downgrades aren't supported and can't reasonably be supported in general.
> Specifically, it is impossible to modify the lower-versioned p
> Then I'm afraid you'll receive more advice in "debian-devel" :-)
Oh, I'll perhaps try. Thanks.
> I find the concept interesting.
> First, because I was not aware that a metapackage could be "itself" up/
> downgraded :-?
"metapackage"is usial package, not virtual package.
> Second, because if
In <201011151334.06503.lukas.linh...@centrumholdings.com>, Lukas Linhart
wrote:
>Problem is, we'd like to be able to downgrade. However. I did not found the
>option to "force download in dependency chain"; when metapackage is being
>downgraded, all dependencies forced to download must be specified
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:34:06 +0100, Lukas Linhart wrote:
> we're building packages with concept of "metapackage": package whose
> only purpose is to specify particular versions it depends on.
Then I'm afraid you'll receive more advice in "debian-devel" :-)
> Problem is, we'd like to be able to d
Lukas Linhart wrote:
> we're building packages with concept of "metapackage": package whose only
> purpose is to specify particular versions it depends on.
Sounds good. It is very commonly done.
> Problem is, we'd like to be able to downgrade. However. I did not found the
> option to "force do
12 matches
Mail list logo
