Tiago Pedrosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:20:08 +0200
> Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello list,I've not come across a definitive answer on this one,
> > probably due to not having search enough. Anyway, what's the best way
> > of updating a box running Stable to r
Bob wrote:
Do I just change my sources from stable to testing and do and update
followed by an upgrade, or do I do a dist-upgrade...? The reason I ask
is that I haven't seen too much info on dist-upgrade and don't really
understand how to use it.
When you do a regular 'upgrade', apt will only
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:20:08 +0200
Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello list,I've not come across a definitive answer on this one,
> probably due to not having search enough. Anyway, what's the best way
> of updating a box running Stable to run Testing...?
>
> Do I just change my sources from s
Hello list,I've not come across a definitive answer on this one,
probably due to not having search enough. Anyway, what's the best way
of updating a box running Stable to run Testing...?
Do I just change my sources from stable to testing and do and update
followed by an upgrade, or do I do a dist
Since most of the packages I use are from the testing release, I'm going
to upgrade my system to testing.
As I have a Broadcom ethernet controller I currently use kernel-image
2.4.26-2-686-smp from woody-proposed-updates.
My server is a HP ProLiant DL140.
So I need a kernel witch supports dual
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 09:28:43 +0100, Jan Minar wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:41:05PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
>> And yes, it's a hack (to get around limited space in the boot sector), but
>> it works OK.
>
> It shouldn't go unnoticed, that the boot sector is a hack, too. Not to
> mention B
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:41:05PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
> And yes, it's a hack (to get around limited space in the boot sector), but
> it works OK.
It shouldn't go unnoticed, that the boot sector is a hack, too. Not to
mention BIOS, which is the thing why the MBR _has_ to be there.
--
Jan
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:23:01 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> Logical vs. Primary. Logical partitions are a work-around for the fact
> that you can only have four primary partitions. So 1-4 are reserved for
> primary partitions, and logical partitions start at 5.
>
> See, it *is* logical =)
>
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 at 17:02 GMT, Josh Robinson penned:
>
> --=-uzmGsEA+c4X4kdWAzKLY Content-Type: text/plain
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>
>> Your must have set your partitions up as logical partitions. Logical
>> partitions start at 5.
>
> how wonderfully, err, logical
>
> Your must have set your partitions up as logical partitions. Logical
> partitions start at 5.
how wonderfully, err, logical
j
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:33:55 +, Josh Robinson wrote:
> all sorted out: thanks to all for your help. nice shiny box, working as
> new - and i no longer have to use pine to get at my email!
>
> for some reason, my partitions are hda5 through 8 - i have no idea quite
> how or why i set them up l
all sorted out: thanks to all for your help. nice shiny box, working as
new - and i no longer have to use pine to get at my email!
for some reason, my partitions are hda5 through 8 - i have no idea quite
how or why i set them up like that, but once i'd found that out, it was
all ok.
oh, and using
Josh Robinson wrote:
thanks for all the advice: still no joy as yet, though
when i boot from the CD, it gives me about 5 options, most of which
involve a new installation. there is, however, the option of executing a
shell command.
when i do that, it tells me i'm about to run ash (whatever that mi
thanks for all the advice: still no joy as yet, though
when i boot from the CD, it gives me about 5 options, most of which
involve a new installation. there is, however, the option of executing a
shell command.
when i do that, it tells me i'm about to run ash (whatever that might be)
and that the
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:02:04 +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 10:32:47AM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:00:41 +0100, HdV wrote:
>> > Note that if you use the lines above you will stay with sarge once it
>> > gets to stable. If you want to continue tracking
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:27:56 -0500, Anthony DiSante wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Note also that sarge currently does NOT have a useful security
>> repository. All security updates for testing need to go through sid
>> first, so there is a not insignificant delay before they are apt-getable
Hi Josh!
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Josh Robinson wrote:
> a problem:
>
> i updated my sources.list file, and ran apt-get dist-upgrade. followed the
> instructions on the screen. and rebooted.
>
> except now my box won't boot. i just get the characters LI (i think) in
> the top left-hand corner of th
Josh Robinson wrote:
Maybe you have one of the woody intaller CD's, boot off the first one,
and when prompted type rescue root=/dev/hdxX <-- replace with your
root partition, probably hda1.
thanks: how do i know which is my root partition? (i can't remember which
is which of my various partit
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 05:11:14PM +, Josh Robinson wrote:
> > Maybe you have one of the woody intaller CD's, boot off the first one,
> > and when prompted type rescue root=/dev/hdxX <-- replace with your
> > root partition, probably hda1.
>
> thanks: how do i know which is my root partiti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note also that sarge currently does NOT have a useful security
repository. All security updates for testing need to go through sid
first, so there is a not insignificant delay before they are apt-getable
for testing...
Most of the time that isn't too much of a problem as "a
> Maybe you have one of the woody intaller CD's, boot off the first one,
> and when prompted type rescue root=/dev/hdxX <-- replace with your
> root partition, probably hda1.
thanks: how do i know which is my root partition? (i can't remember which
is which of my various partitions - i can't r
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 10:32:47AM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:00:41 +0100, HdV wrote:
> > Note that if you use the lines above you will stay with sarge once it
> > gets to stable. If you want to continue tracking testing after that
> > you should change all occurances of "sa
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:00:41 +0100, HdV wrote:
>
> Note that if you use the lines above you will stay with sarge once it
> gets to stable. If you want to continue tracking testing after that
> you should change all occurances of "sarge" with "testing" in the above
> lines.
>
That's exactly the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:32:58 + (GMT)
Josh Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a problem:
>
> i updated my sources.list file, and ran apt-get dist-upgrade. followed the
> instructions on the screen. and rebooted.
>
> except now my box won't boo
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Anthony DiSante wrote:
> > deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian sarge main contrib non-free
> > deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US sarge/non-US main contrib non-free
> > deb http://security.debian.org sarge/updates main contrib non-free
> >
> > WATCH for the sarge word
a problem:
i updated my sources.list file, and ran apt-get dist-upgrade. followed the
instructions on the screen. and rebooted.
except now my box won't boot. i just get the characters LI (i think) in
the top left-hand corner of teh screen, and nothing happens.
what should i do?
josh
--
To UN
Hugo S. Carrer wrote:
If the box has a connection to the internet all you need to do is the
following:
1) Open as root the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite editor
and uncomment or add if missing the folowing lines.
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian sarge main contrib non-free
deb ht
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 16:21:40 -0500, Anthony DiSante wrote:
>
> ...and it makes me think that I can put lines into /etc/apt/preferences
> and/or /etc/apt/apt.conf that will cause "apt-get upgrade" to upgrade me to
> the testing release. Is that correct? If so, exactly what do I need to put
>
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 16:21:40 -0500, Anthony DiSante wrote:
> Hello,
> ...and it makes me think that I can put lines into /etc/apt/preferences
> and/or /etc/apt/apt.conf that will cause "apt-get upgrade" to upgrade me to
> the testing release. Is that correct? If so, exactly what do I need to p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 16:21:40 -0500
Anthony DiSante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> ...
> ...and/or /etc/apt/apt.conf that will cause "apt-get upgrade" to upgrade me to
> the testing release. Is that correct? If so, exactly what do I need to p
Hello,
I've been using Slackware for a little over a year now, and have loved it
except for one thing: installing programs. Most of the time it goes just
fine, but the 10% or 20% of the time when it doesn't, it's incredibly
frustrating. After spending an entire day last week trying to get Tux
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 11:50:28PM +, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 00:38:49 +0100, Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> penned:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I think I'm ready to upgrade my main desktop machine from stable.
> > I've been running stable (with an XF4.3 backport) for months
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 00:38:49 +0100, Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> penned:
> Hi all,
>
> I think I'm ready to upgrade my main desktop machine from stable.
> I've been running stable (with an XF4.3 backport) for months now with
> no problems. Only thing is, I'm starting to run into too many pac
Hi all,
I think I'm ready to upgrade my main desktop machine from stable.
I've been running stable (with an XF4.3 backport) for months now with
no problems. Only thing is, I'm starting to run into too many packages
where I do need new features and fixes.
I'm tempted to go straight to unstable -
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:21:51AM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> Nearly. Testing has got (effectively) no new binary packages in months,
> because sid has switched to libc6 2.3.1, which is, er, 'a little buggy'.
> It's been broken enough that it's been unable to move into testing, and
> since all binar
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 12:53:48AM -0500, sean finney wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 10:44:16PM -0600, Hanasaki JiJi wrote:
> > IMO, yes.
> >
> > Although, I use "sarge" not "testing" to be sure that I dont
> > inadvertantly upgrade to the next version of testing by accident.
>
> right, but be
On February 24, 2003 05:15 pm, M. Kirchhoff wrote:
> How do the two methods differ? I don't know anything about downreving,
> so I wasn't aware that modifying my sources.list as outlined below would
> prevent me from doing that... thanks for the response
Keeping the "stable" lines in your apt.sou
ebruary 24, 2003 9:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Upgrading from Stable to Testing
> -Original Message-
> From: M. Kirchhoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Once I've got the Stable release of Woody running, is the best way to
> move up to the Testing level to s
> -Original Message-
> From: M. Kirchhoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Once I've got the Stable release of Woody running, is the best way to
> move up to the Testing level to simply change my to point
> to
>
> http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing main
>
> and then run
>
> apt-get up
On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 10:44:16PM -0600, Hanasaki JiJi wrote:
> IMO, yes.
>
> Although, I use "sarge" not "testing" to be sure that I dont
> inadvertantly upgrade to the next version of testing by accident.
right, but beware, there's lots of folks who say that testing is
worse off than unstable
IMO, yes.
Although, I use "sarge" not "testing" to be sure that I dont
inadvertantly upgrade to the next version of testing by accident.
M. Kirchhoff wrote:
Once I've got the Stable release of Woody running, is the best way to
move up to the Testing level to simply change my to point
to
http://
Once I've got the Stable release of Woody running, is the best way to
move up to the Testing level to simply change my to point
to
http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing main
and then run
apt-get update
apt-get dist-upgrade
If there's a better/more efficient way, please let me know! Thanks!
At 10:16 30/05/2002, Falk Hueffner sent this up the stick:
Goswin Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The woody alpha install images have that nasty loop bug with the base
> > pkg.
> > Ted
>
> Still?
>
> Sid/unstable too? You can install
Goswin Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The woody alpha install images have that nasty loop bug with the base
> > pkg.
> > Ted
>
> Still?
>
> Sid/unstable too? You can install till your in that loop and then
> replace the faulty deb w
"Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The woody alpha install images have that nasty loop bug with the base
> pkg.
> Ted
Still?
Sid/unstable too? You can install till your in that loop and then
replace the faulty deb with a newer one.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
Robert Funnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 28 May 2002, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>
> > >edit /etc/apt/sources.list to point to woody, and do apt-get
> > >dist-upgrade
> > >
> > This usually works great, but for an upgrade of this magnitude (between
> > releases), I'd strongly recommend d
Robert Funnell wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2002, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
edit /etc/apt/sources.list to point to woody, and do apt-get
dist-upgrade
This usually works great, but for an upgrade of this magnitude (between
releases), I'd strongly recommend dselect or another tool with
interactive depe
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 06:59:11PM -0400, Robert Funnell wrote:
> I was going to ask if one could do this using dselect rather than
> apt-get dist-upgrade, but concluded that it was a dumb question and
> that the answer was obviously 'no'. I guess I was wrong. Do you have
> to do anything special i
On 2002.05.29 05:59 Robert Funnell wrote:
I'm also confused about kernels. I think I read that there was a
choice of kernel versions to use with woody. I guess there's no
problem with upgrading to woody using the same old kernel? I assume
that dselect doesn't do kernels.
Usually, you wouldn't h
On Tue, 28 May 2002, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> >edit /etc/apt/sources.list to point to woody, and do apt-get
> >dist-upgrade
> >
> This usually works great, but for an upgrade of this magnitude (between
> releases), I'd strongly recommend dselect or another tool with
> interactive dependency negot
Falk Hueffner wrote:
"Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I know this has been asked before, but what are , in general terms, the
way of upgrading an entire system to woody? I have to install stable
first (on an alpha...due to woody install glitches),
Hmm, what's wrong with the
Mike Egglestone wrote:
> APT has to be the greatest thing ever.
Jes, it is.
> All you really need to do is edit your /etc/apt/sources.list file
> to point to either stable, or testing, or unstable and then
> run
> #apt-get update
> #apt-get dist-upgrade
>
> Obviously, you want woody, so you w
Hi,
APT has to be the greatest thing ever.
All you really need to do is edit your /etc/apt/sources.list file
to point to either stable, or testing, or unstable and then
run
#apt-get update
#apt-get dist-upgrade
Obviously, you want woody, so you would point apt sources to "testing".
To point th
rg; debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: upgrading from stable to woody
>
> "Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I know this has been asked before, but what are , in general terms,
the
> > way of upgrading an entire system to woody? I
"Ted Goodridge, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I know this has been asked before, but what are , in general terms, the
> way of upgrading an entire system to woody? I have to install stable
> first (on an alpha...due to woody install glitches),
Hmm, what's wrong with the woody installation?
I know this has been asked before, but what are , in general terms, the
way of upgrading an entire system to woody? I have to install stable
first (on an alpha...due to woody install glitches), and need help
finding documentation on how to do it.
Ted
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECT
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 09:27:59PM -0700, Rich Rudnick wrote:
>
> I'm still new to debian, but I'm here because these things do get fixed :)
Agreed.
Mike
--
Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a
good ide
On Fri, 03 Aug 2001 13:26:53 Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:08:08PM -0700, Rich Rudnick wrote:
>
> > The recommended fix (search the archives) is to upgrade to woody first,
> > then sid. Worked for me.
>
> I assume that they're fixing this problem though, no? I mean,
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:22:49PM -0700, Shriram Shrikumar wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> several people including myself. There is a package that you need to
> install manually - I think its db2 something (it was early in the
> morning when i was doing this). try doing a search with google on
> libdb2.so
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:08:08PM -0700, Rich Rudnick wrote:
> The recommended fix (search the archives) is to upgrade to woody first,
> then sid. Worked for me.
I assume that they're fixing this problem though, no? I mean, it should
work, and Debian has the wonderful tendency to do what it
Hi Mike,
several people including myself. There is a package that you need to
install manually - I think its db2 something (it was early in the
morning when i was doing this). try doing a search with google on
libdb2.so.3 - gives you some pointers if that doesnt work.
Hope this helps
Shri
-
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 9:10 PM
> Subject: Re: problems upgrading from stable
>
>
> | I had the same error when upgrading from 2.2R2
> | --- Original Message ---
> | From: "Michael P. Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | To: Debian User Mailing List
&g
Me too. It was a fresh install and I formatted again.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael P. Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Debian User Mailing List"
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: problems upgrading from stab
I had the same error when upgrading from 2.2R2
--- Original Message ---
From: "Michael P. Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian User Mailing List
Subject: problems upgrading from stable
>Hey people.=20
>
>So, I just installed 2.2r3, with only a base system, a
Hey people.
So, I just installed 2.2r3, with only a base system, and then
dist-upgraded to unstable...almost.
libreadline4 died at a perl script saying that it couldn't find
libdb2.so.3. Looks like it introduced a dependency without installing the
required packages.
Has anyone
65 matches
Mail list logo
