On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 11:50:30AM -0800, Patrick Lane wrote:
> Some of us using unstable use it because we have to. That is, we have to
> if we want to run Debian. For example, I installed unstable for XF86
> 4.2. w/o it, I had to do a mickey mouse work-around to get my xserver to
> start, which t
On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 01:29:55PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 08:40:22PM -0800, Paul Mackinney wrote:
> > > # dpkg -i --force-downgrade
>/var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_1%3a2.95.4-12_i386.deb
> > In general I knew that this was an option, but of course 'man dpk
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 08:40:22PM -0800, Paul Mackinney wrote:
> > # dpkg -i --force-downgrade
>/var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_1%3a2.95.4-12_i386.deb
> In general I knew that this was an option, but of course 'man dpkg' was
> one of the commands that failed...
I'm fairly sure tha
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 10:02:14AM -0500, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Personally, I write POSIX shell code. Beyond that the variation is too
> > random to be able to write code that is both portable and useful.
>
> You must not use symlinks, then, since they a
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Must be quite old SunOS:
>
> [colinw@hades ~]$ uname -a
> SunOS hades 5.6 Generic_105181-12 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
Raja may have been talking about SunOS 4, back when it was
BSD-based. While I have no SunOS 4 boxes left to test on, I find it
hard
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:06:21PM -0600, Raja R Harinath wrote:
> Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> 'ln -sf' is a GNU ln extension. It is safer to use 'ln -f -s',
> >> especially if you traffic on other unices.
> >
> > Huh? It's worked p
Craig Dickson declaimed:
> It's unfortunate that this happened, but this is unstable, and
> developers aren't perfect. I'm actually less disturbed that this
> happened than that so many people have posted desperate "please help"
> messages about it,
That was sort of my point. I looked for a messag
Hi,
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> 'ln -sf' is a GNU ln extension. It is safer to use 'ln -f -s',
>> especially if you traffic on other unices.
>
> Huh? It's worked perfectly well on every Unix I've ever used. It
> even works on SCO.
Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 'ln -sf' is a GNU ln extension. It is safer to use 'ln -f -s',
> especially if you traffic on other unices.
Huh? It's worked perfectly well on every Unix I've ever used. It
even works on SCO. Next you'll be telling us that we can't do "ls
-al" we
Hi,
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 05:08:51PM -0600, Gary Turner wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:19:58 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> >The libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_2.95.4-14 package contains a broken
>> >libstdc++ library. To work around the problem, provide th
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 05:08:51PM -0600, Gary Turner wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:19:58 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >The libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_2.95.4-14 package contains a broken
> >libstdc++ library. To work around the problem, provide the missing
> >library by a smbolic link. Execute as r
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:19:58 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>The libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_2.95.4-14 package contains a broken
>libstdc++ library. To work around the problem, provide the missing
>library by a smbolic link. Execute as root:
>
>ln -sf libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so /usr/lib/libstdc++-lib
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:32:14PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Patrick Lane wrote:
>
> > Some of us using unstable use it because we have to. That is, we have to
> > if we want to run Debian. For example, I installed unstable for XF86
> > 4.2. w/o it, I had to do a mickey mouse work-around to ge
"Robert L. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thus spake Brian Nelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
>> The 10+ duplicate bug reports filed against libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
>> was a bit much, though libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 doesn't have the
>> longevity of man-db and the duplicate bugs filed for "man -k"
>
Patrick Lane wrote:
> Some of us using unstable use it because we have to. That is, we have to
> if we want to run Debian. For example, I installed unstable for XF86
> 4.2. w/o it, I had to do a mickey mouse work-around to get my xserver to
> start, which to me is way worse.
Hmm. Admittedly, the
Thus spake Brian Nelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Fixed libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 package
> From: Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:43:50 -0800
> X-Mailing-List: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archive/latest/24533
Patrick Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 11:05, Craig Dickson wrote:
>
>> Seriously, for your own sake (and this is the generic
>> "you", I'm not addressing Paul specifically, as I don't know what he can
>> or can't do for himself), why run unstable, which is _intended_ as
On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 11:05, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Seriously, for your own sake (and this is the generic
> "you", I'm not addressing Paul specifically, as I don't know what he can
> or can't do for himself), why run unstable, which is _intended_ as a
> place for leading-edge testing -- "catch it
Paul Mackinney wrote:
> Thanks for posting this! It kept my down-time < 5 minutes.
>
> The moral: when something big goes wrong after an apt-get upgrade, try
> again, then try deb-user.
If you can still get to it with a b0rked system. Just imagine if your
only mail and web clients had been writt
Matthias Klose declaimed:
> The libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2_2.95.4-14 package contains a broken
> libstdc++ library. To work around the problem, provide the missing
> library by a smbolic link. Execute as root:
>
> ln -sf libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3
>
> A fixed pac
20 matches
Mail list logo
