On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 06:22:18AM +0200, Matthijs wrote:
> ...
> I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recognize you're problem
> with the package management. I'm used to a windows environment. You
> want a new application? Go to the website, download the setup.exe and
> execute - you're don
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 06:22:18AM +0200, Matthijs wrote:
> I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recognize you're problem
> with the package management. I'm used to a windows environment. You
> want a new application? Go to the website, download the setup.exe and
> execute - you're done.
Us
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:50:12 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> You rule! Finally! Man, I'm not sure what to think of Debian yet. I'm
> having a hard time picking up the package management system for some reason.
You're welcome!
I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recogni
You rule! Finally! Man, I'm not sure what to think of Debian yet. I'm
having a hard time picking up the package management system for some reason.
Also, testing distro doesn't seem to have the libc-client2002edebian
package, but an install of the unstable package worked fine.
While, I am at
Yep, the same thing is happening with POP3 as well. Thanks a bunch, I
will give this a try.
Matthijs wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:10:09 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So, I have having problems getting unstable and testing versions of
uw-impad Debian packages working. The vers
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:10:09 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> So, I have having problems getting unstable and testing versions of
> uw-impad Debian packages working. The version numbers are
> 7:2002edebian1-3 and 7:2002ddebian1-4 respectivly. With these two
> packages installed
KRF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On the advice of some compadres I have ordered the 7 CD package so
> that I can try Debian.
If the label says "Debian 3.0" (or 3.0r1, or 3.0r2), or "woody", then
it's stable. That is, in fact, a 7-CD set, though you get two choices
for the first CD (so CheapByte
*official* debian cds are stable. After you install upgrading to
unstable or testing is easy and painless.
I use unstable because I love having up2date (excuse the rh pun)
software and I dont like waiting for milestone releases from other dists
ie. redhat/mandrake.
Upgrading to unstable or testi
* KRF ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031007 17:22]:
> On the advice of some compadres I have ordered the 7 CD package so that I can
> try Debian. I currently run RH 7.x and 9 and was griping about RedHat
> always moving stuff from to some oddball location and having to reregister
> every thirty days to
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 09:48:23PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 07:56:29PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
> > At 09:48 AM 02/20/02 -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> > >Ok, I am now better informed. It does say alot about the upgrade
> > >process that I have not been doing that and hav
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 10:40:34PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
> >Use IDEPCI image. You may not even use driver disks. :)
>
> Yes, I wondered. Any idea of a rtl8139 network driver is in that image?
Not as compiled in kernel but as module, I think but not sure. Nice
thing is its driver-disk is 2-
At 09:48 PM 02/20/02 -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>There will be "incident" if you upgrade many times. That is why it is
>called "testing", or "unstable". "incident" can be dealt with minimum
>trouble if you know how.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/quick-reference/
I've read that. Nice work
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 07:56:29PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
> At 09:48 AM 02/20/02 -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> >Ok, I am now better informed. It does say alot about the upgrade
> >process that I have not been doing that and have gone through several
> >stable->testing->unstable upgrades without
At 09:48 AM 02/20/02 -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
>> Both I and the release notes normally recommend upgrading dpkg and apt
>> by hand first, yes.
>
>Ok, I am now better informed. It does say alot about the upgrade
>process that I have not been doing that and have gone through several
>stable->testi
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:10:42PM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
[...]
> > chris watson has, in the past, suggested that the first thing to be
> > upgraded
> > are the apt tools because, apparrently, those in potato differ from those
> > in
> > woody and sid.
>
> Both I and the release notes norm
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 12:33:06AM -0800, ben wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2002 12:45 pm, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 11:22:38PM -0700, debian wrote:
> > > After I edit my sources.list and run: 'apt-get update', what packages am
> > > I supposed to install prior to running: '
On Tuesday 19 February 2002 12:45 pm, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 11:22:38PM -0700, debian wrote:
> > After I edit my sources.list and run: 'apt-get update', what packages am
> > I supposed to install prior to running: 'apt-get dist-upgrade' ??
>
> You shouldn't have to install an
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 11:22:38PM -0700, debian wrote:
> After I edit my sources.list and run: 'apt-get update', what packages am
> I supposed to install prior to running: 'apt-get dist-upgrade' ??
You shouldn't have to install anything - dist-upgrade will take care of
that for you. I would sugg
I upgraded from stable to unstable, and now whenever I continue the upgrade,
debconf is complaining about perl.
Error is below..
Setting up debconf (0.2.58) ...
Can't locate overload.pm in @INC (@INC contains: .
/usr/lib/perl5/5.005/i386-linux /usr/lib/perl5/5.005
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/i386-li
On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Adam Shand wrote:
> Now in order to compile KDE I have to have libgif* which require xlib6g
> etc etc... this is a bit frustrating as I am somewhat reluctant to put so
> crucial a part of my system into the 'unstable' tree. Is it possible that
> older versions of the non-free
20 matches
Mail list logo
