On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:58:33AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 11:54:24AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > On
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 11:54:24AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > >
>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > >
> > > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:51:39AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >
> > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
> > inside the chroot? I think udev wants a kernel >= 2.6.15, IIRC.
>
> Interest
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >
> > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
> > inside the chroot? I think udev wants a kernel >= 2.6.15, IIRC.
>
> Actually
On Monday 11 December 2006 14:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > > without either
On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > without either a functioning X or a functioning net. udev complains
> > t
On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > without either a functioning X or a functioning net. udev complains
> > t
On 12/7/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mail
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:40:27AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I tried that, and got a *huge* raft of proposed deletions -- just from
> asking for aptitude to be upgraded.
what did you use to upgrade aptitude? you might want to use something
that thinks its less intelligent to do this. I
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > and tried to ins
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 05:05:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > Sound like what I have seen "as usual" while doing dist upgrades (Debian
> > and Ubuntu). Several a
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > and tried to ins
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> and tried to install etch form scratch using installer release candidate
> one, only t
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> and tried to install etch form scratch using installer release candidate
> one, o
16 matches
Mail list logo