On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 18:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I recently upgraded my slink box to potato with apt. Everything works
> well but the new ssh:
>
> neptun:/home/papt# dpkg --configure ssh
> Setting up ssh (1.2.3-5) ...
^
I think this was fixed around -7, an
On Sat, Jan 15, 2000 at 01:01:51PM -0800, Michael Perry wrote:
> Hi all-
>
> I just got dsl here so have a system I would like to take from slink to
> potato using the apt-get install dist-upgrade. Has anyone done this
> recently? Any issues?
I did the upgrade last friday on my laptop. no real
On Sat, Jan 15, 2000 at 01:56:51PM -0800, Michael Perry wrote:
> I just got dsl here so have a system I would like to take from slink to
> potato using the apt-get install dist-upgrade. Has anyone done this
> recently? Any issues? Also would just like to say thanks to everyone that
> develops fo
Damir J. Naden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm asking this because when I install (by ignoring libc6
> =>2.1 dependancy) imagemagick or xfig from potato on a slink system
> (along with whatever they depend on- the dpkg is installing them
> cleanly), all I get is segfaults galore. That indicates t
Hi Greg Wooledge; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> Damon Muller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > If I want to
> > check out something that is only in Potato, I go and use apt-get to grab
> > and install it. If it uses glibc2.1, it'll get that, and any other libs
> > that it depends on.
>
> Y
Damon Muller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> If I want to
> check out something that is only in Potato, I go and use apt-get to grab
> and install it. If it uses glibc2.1, it'll get that, and any other libs
> that it depends on.
Yup.
> Being `binary compatible', does this mean that all the apps tha
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 09:21:18PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to state:
> >
> > That was supposed to be the point of my message -- In my experience,
> > upgrading from glibc 2.0 to 2.1 is *trivial*, and needs no special
> > consideration, migration guides, hand-holding sessions, or support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, Damir J. Naden wrote:
> I have been in this thread way too long :-), but ... I have to agree
> with Damon's post. And I have been told that glibc2.1 and glibc2.0 are
> binary compatible.
Glibc 2.1 is binary compatible with glibc 2.0. That me
>
> That was supposed to be the point of my message -- In my experience,
> upgrading from glibc 2.0 to 2.1 is *trivial*, and needs no special
> consideration, migration guides, hand-holding sessions, or support
> groups.
>
> Stop whining and just do it.
>
> -Miles
>
> p.s. The `stop whining' b
"Damir J. Naden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have been told that glibc2.1 and glibc2.0 are binary compatible.
For most purposes, they are. Of course this is software, and software
has bugs, so there are almost certainly odd cases where things don't
work; but they appear to be quite the except
Hi Miles Bader; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> Damon Muller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Because of the developments such as glibc2.1, perl, and probably
> > numerous other things, you can't take something out of Potato and put it
> > on a Slink system and expect it to work. It's an all-o
Damon Muller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Because of the developments such as glibc2.1, perl, and probably
> numerous other things, you can't take something out of Potato and put it
> on a Slink system and expect it to work. It's an all-or-nothing
> arrangement. They may both be `GNU/Linux', but t
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 03:38:05AM +0100, Mark Brown was heard to state:
> > > The stable GNOME packages are actually produced by the Debian
> > > maintainers - they're just distributed from the GNOME site.
>
> > So, why would they not be introduced into slink-proposed-updates?
>
> The only thing
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 10:02:55PM -0400, Damir J. Naden wrote:
> Hi Mark Brown; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> > That idea is intented to be closer to unstable than stable - at this
> > point, there would probably be as much hassle updating to the in-between
> > release as there is updatin
Hi Mark Brown; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> Damir, are you sure mutt is using vim? If you have nvi installed and
> haven't adjusted the alternatives vi will default to that and if you
> normally use a shell alias to select your vi mutt won't pick that up.
Yup, I'm positive. I am a contro
Hi Miles Bader; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There's a howto somewhere on the Debian site saying which packages have to
> > be updated to use a 2.2 kernel with Slink.
>
> Do you have any idea where this would be? I've been searching the
> debian site
Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's a howto somewhere on the Debian site saying which packages have to
> be updated to use a 2.2 kernel with Slink.
Do you have any idea where this would be? I've been searching the
debian site for this kind of info with no luck. I did try a 2.2.10
kernel,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I've been slowly upgrading my packages from slink to potato, and
> > frankly, have never had a single problem.
>
> How are you doing this? Do you just go get the packages and 'dpkg -i' them
> or do you use apt? There are a bunch of things I want to upgrade on my
> s
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 01:55:22AM -0500, Brad wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Damir J. Naden wrote:
> > Hi Brad; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> > > Hmmm... exactly 80-column lines, more or less. 72 or 76 is much better
> > > though, it leaves room for replies.
> > Ooops, sorry, I don't know h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Damir J. Naden wrote:
> Hi Brad; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> > Hmmm... exactly 80-column lines, more or less. 72 or 76 is much better
> > though, it leaves room for replies.
>
> Ooops, sorry, I don't know how that happened; my vimr
Hi Brad; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
> Hmmm... exactly 80-column lines, more or less. 72 or 76 is much better
> though, it leaves room for replies.
Ooops, sorry, I don't know how that happened; my vimrc files specs 76 columns,
maybe I need separate command in muttrc?
> I'm not sure what
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 09:17:07AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Wouldn't it be nice is this information was collated at one location so
> that people could build on what's already been done and not have to try
> everything new every time. That's what open source is about--sharing.
> What I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, B. Szyszka wrote:
> > As for the version, i'd go with the latest stable (2.2.12, unless they
> > released 2.2.13 just today). There's even a brand new Debian package so
> > you won't have to compile your own if you don't want.
>
> Where woul
> As for the version, i'd go with the latest stable (2.2.12, unless they
> released 2.2.13 just today). There's even a brand new Debian package so
> you won't have to compile your own if you don't want.
Where would I be able to find that package?
--
Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ:4982727
B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 1 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My real question is: To upgrade from slink to potato, should I go to a
> 2.2 kernel under slink first? I know those issues are documented on
> the Debian site. If so, what kernel version is most likely to prevent
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hmmm... exactly 80-column lines, more or less. 72 or 76 is much better
though, it leaves room for replies.
On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Damir J. Naden wrote:
> Hi Brad; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
>
> ---stuff snipped here--
>
> > Depending on the particular p
Based on some advice in this thread, I decided to try upgrading a few
non-critical packages to see how it would go. After getting a few things
upgraded without a hitch, I decided to give samba a try. It broke.
After downgrading samba (also easy) so it would keep working, I looked
for the problem i
Hi Brad; unless Mutt is confused, you wrote:
---stuff snipped here--
> Depending on the particular package, recompiling for slink can be as
> simple as "apt-get --compile source packagename" (with a new enough
> version of apt, of course). The versioned Perl dependancies and such can
> be fixed b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> When I talked with some Debian folks at Linux World, they indicated
> that Potato was fairly stable and that I could safely upgrade a Slink
> installation to Potato without problems. However, when looking at the
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/apt-sources/
>
> This is the type of information that should be linked to on the Debian host
> site.
Unfortunately, the Debian web page is pretty static except for
the dynamically generated package indices. Nothing mu
> http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/apt-sources/
This is the type of information that should be linked to on the Debian host
site. One should not have to come to the Mailing Lists to find this. The
logical place to put this is with the Gnome Slink update link.
I can see that much of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I will, however, write up a Debian Update HowTo which
> lists those Unstable modules which people have ported to Slink so that
> every other person who wants to do this doesn't have to go through the
> agony of researching everything anew.
>
> I know
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 09:58:59AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Rob,
>
> I'm no apt expert. Would you write up a section on Apt for a Debian
> Update HowTo? I will voluteer to edit and put it together as well
> as providing content. If need be, I will even host it on my server.
>
> The Ho
> On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 08:17:41AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > How are you doing this? Do you just go get the packages and 'dpkg -i' them
> > or do you use apt? There are a bunch of things I want to upgrade on my
> > system but I assumed that all of the potato packages would have depend
> When I asked a similar question a long time ago (but still when slink
> was stable!) it was explained to me thusly: if you start modifying
> "stable", then you might break it. That means that if one permitted
> regular modifications/upgrades to stable packages, one would have to
> go through th
> Well, it's a bit better than that - particularly if you keep up with the
> various lists (mostly -user and -devel) you should be all right. It's
> more a case of "pay attention and be prepared to fix things if they
> break" than anything else. I'd guess that a fair proportion of
> developers ar
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 08:17:41AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:52:47PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> > I've been slowly upgrading my packages from slink to potato, and
> > frankly, have never had a single problem. I was nervous about upgrading
> > perl, because I've
In linux.debian.user, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Some people just don't have the luxury of working with Unstable. However, much
>of the software released, like Gnome, GIMP, LyX and such *is* stable.
>Enlightenment 0.15.x is quite stable, albeit incomplete. It is no less stable
>than the 0.14.6 that ships
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 12:54:24AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is what I've heard, but not what I see in the mailing list archive
> where people ask about problems with Potato and they are answered only
> "That's what unstable means." In other words, you're on your own, pal.
Well, it'
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:52:47PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> I've been slowly upgrading my packages from slink to potato, and
> frankly, have never had a single problem. I was nervous about upgrading
> perl, because I've seen all sorts of veiled references to possible
> hosage (although I've nev
> I've been slowly upgrading my packages from slink to potato, and
> frankly, have never had a single problem. I was nervous about upgrading
> perl, because I've seen all sorts of veiled references to possible
> hosage (although I've never seen a concise statement of the actual
> problem), but eve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> When I talked with some Debian folks at Linux World, they indicated
> that Potato was fairly stable and that I could safely upgrade a Slink
> installation to Potato without problems. However, when looking at the
> mailing list archives, it seems that it isn't so. For o
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Christian Dysthe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> updated to potato. Looks like everything went fine except for these two errors
> I get when I boot:
>
> 1. [mntent]: no final newline at the end of /etc/fstab
edit your fstab and add a blank line on the end
> 2. Modprobe can't find netpf1
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Christian Dysthe wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
> updated to potato. Looks like everything went fine except for these two errors
> I get when I boot:
>
> 1. [mntent]: no final newline at the end of /etc/fstab
Put in a newline at the end of /etc/fstab?
> 2. Modprobe can't find netpf19
Th
44 matches
Mail list logo
