On Tuesday 05 September 2006 09:23, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 04:45:50 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > I think that's what he's running.
>
> Thanks, Ron, for the clarification. Why the hell would I take all this
> pleading and yelling on me if I were running Sid or Testing ??
>
> Uwe
M
Uwe Dippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 04:44:19 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> > OTOH, IMNSHO, what the heck are you doing running Moz 1.0.2 (or
> > 1.0.8)??? Upgrade already!
>
> No, Ron, you don't get it here. Debian stable is what I run. It is not my
> task to
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 04:45:50 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> I think that's what he's running.
Thanks, Ron, for the clarification. Why the hell would I take all this
pleading and yelling on me if I were running Sid or Testing ??
Uwe
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 04:44:19 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> OTOH, IMNSHO, what the heck are you doing running Moz 1.0.2 (or
> 1.0.8)??? Upgrade already!
No, Ron, you don't get it here. Debian stable is what I run. It is not my
task to find out that I ought to upgrade.
I trust Debian and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> On Monday 04 September 2006 21:16, Uwe Dippel wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:08:11 -0400, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
[snip]
>
> two words - install stable.
I think that's what he's running.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jeffer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Uwe Dippel wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 16:18:07 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> Nevertheless, have you considered upgrading to 1.5.0.6, either thru
>> backports.or or the mozilla.org binary?
>
> I answered this elsewhere here:
Sorry. I read the thr
On Monday 04 September 2006 21:16, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:08:11 -0400, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> > Other than filing bugs in BTS and using apt-listbugs, you can also put
> > information about serious breakages etc., in
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Status/Unstable
>
> Thanks, Ra
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 16:18:07 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Nevertheless, have you considered upgrading to 1.5.0.6, either thru
> backports.or or the mozilla.org binary?
I answered this elsewhere here:
If ever we wanted to take a larger part of the desktop / server market, we
have to change our atti
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:08:11 -0400, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> Other than filing bugs in BTS and using apt-listbugs, you can also put
> information about serious breakages etc., in
> http://wiki.debian.org/Status/Unstable
Thanks, Raju,
for pointing out that I am *right* !
Not everyone has th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Uwe Dippel wrote:
[snip]
> mozilla-thunderbird_1.0.2-2.sarge1.0.8b.1_i386.deb is the version
> I'm running here on Sarge.
While bit rot should not happen, Tbird 1.0.2 is pretty old. Or does
"sarge1.0.8b" mean that Sarge has actually been upgraded to
On Monday 04 September 2006 13:33, Uwe Dippel wrote:
>
> What is not good, though, is the lack of information; somehow. I googled
> intensely; read all archives, lists. Nothing. Didn't think of a bug
> report. Invested > 1 hour. No solution. Wrote to the list; had some good
> hints (meaning: more
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 01:33:39AM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 10:46:31 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
>
> > Look here [1] on how to get a fix for this. The fixed package will be
> > rolled out as soon as all architectures build.
> >
> > BTW, we need more testers for security rel
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 10:46:31 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> Look here [1] on how to get a fix for this. The fixed package will be
> rolled out as soon as all architectures build.
>
> BTW, we need more testers for security releases. Just keep the apt
> lines mentioned in that bug and report issues
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 01:22:56AM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> ... after the last upgrade of Thunderbird on Sarge, I noticed that of the
> Attachments field only the upper third part was visible .
> No chance to see a name of an attachment or click on any.
> No, I'm not a newbie I have tried re
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 10:48:56 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> apt-get remove --purge mozilla-thunderbird
apt-get remove --purge mozilla-thunderbird
cd /etc/mozilla-thunderbird/
rm -Rf *
cd ..
rmdir mozilla-thunderbird/
apt-get install mozilla-thunderbird
(there was some
dpkg - warning: whil
Uwe Dippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have
> apt-get remove mozilla-thunderbird
> apt-get install mozilla-thunderbird
> and I see no changes
>
> Uwe
That won't help, you need to purge the package in order to remove
config files as well. Try
aptitude purge mozilla-thunderbird
or IIR
On 09/01/2006 02:10 PM, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> ... after the last upgrade of Thunderbird on Sarge, I noticed that of the
> Attachments field only the upper third part was visible .
> No chance to see a name of an attachment or click on any.
> No, I'm not a newbie I have tried resizing the window,
... after the last upgrade of Thunderbird on Sarge, I noticed that of the
Attachments field only the upper third part was visible .
No chance to see a name of an attachment or click on any.
No, I'm not a newbie I have tried resizing the window, the panes,
fonts, you name it. It simply doesn't
18 matches
Mail list logo
