Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

> With multi-seat (ISTR the term originated at Redhat), people started > to re-invent what a "user session" means. In a confusingly and quite > irritatingly new manner, mind you. So you now (yay!) can have two Gnome > sessions. But you pay the price that a Gnome session is quite a different > beast

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:13:59PM -0500, Dan Purgert wrote: > On Nov 11, 2024, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: [...] > > Multiseat is one particular form of multiuser computer. There are > > lots of other forms. A computer where one person at a time uses it is > > called a single user computer

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On 11/11/24 16:14, Dan Purgert wrote: On Nov 11, 2024, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 13:33:08 +0100, Roger Price wrote: I'm guessing "version". How about Debian 12 (bookworm). Have you read https://wiki.debian.org/Multi_Seat_Debian_HOWTO ?

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Nov 11, 2024, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 13:33:08 +0100, Roger Price wrote: > > > I'm guessing "version". How about Debian 12 (bookworm). Have you > > > read https://wiki.debian.org/Multi_Seat_Debian_HOWTO ? > > > > Oh. I've learne

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024, 8:10 AM Bret Busby wrote: > On 11/11/24 22:00, Michael Kjörling wrote: > > On 11 Nov 2024 21:24 +0800, from b...@busby.net (Bret Busby): > >> Whilst this computer that I am using, has about ten USB sockets > (including > >> four on the front), I expect that a similar worksta

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 13:33:08 +0100 (CET) Roger Price wrote: > On Mon, 11 Nov 2024, brian mckee wrote: > > > I have a work station.   > > If I put debian on it. > > I want it to have 5 monsters. > > I'm guessing 5 "monitors". > > > 5 key boards. > > 5 mice. > > So 5 people can long in. At sam

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 11 Nov 2024 21:24 +0800, from b...@busby.net (Bret Busby): > > Whilst this computer that I am using, has about ten USB sockets > > (including four on the front), I expect that a similar workstation > > to this, would be required, or, a proper server, with all of the >

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 13:33:08 +0100, Roger Price wrote: > > I'm guessing "version". How about Debian 12 (bookworm). Have you > > read https://wiki.debian.org/Multi_Seat_Debian_HOWTO ? > > Oh. I've learned something today. I looked at that page and what I immediatel

Re: Debian versions

On 11/11/24 07:39, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 03:26:26 +, brian mckee wrote: I have a work station. If I put debian on it. I want it to have 5 monsters. 5 key boards. 5 mice. So 5 people can long in. At same time. What Verizon should I download Autocorrect is a monitor.

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

Bret Busby wrote: > With the "5 monsters", each having a separate keyboard and mouse, I wonder > whether the "monsters" means users... > > UNIX, to serve up to 32 users), and that, if this is the case, the > workstation would need to have 5 video sockets and 10 USB sockets to serve > the keyboard

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On 11/11/24 22:00, Michael Kjörling wrote: On 11 Nov 2024 21:24 +0800, from b...@busby.net (Bret Busby): Whilst this computer that I am using, has about ten USB sockets (including four on the front), I expect that a similar workstation to this, would be required, or, a proper server, with all of

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, 11 Nov 2024, Bret Busby wrote: ..., the workstation would need to have 5 video sockets and 10 USB sockets to serve the keyboards and meeces, or, if the monitors can be served from USB sockets, 15 USB sockets. .. I expect that a similar workstation to this, would be required, or, a pro

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On 11 Nov 2024 21:24 +0800, from b...@busby.net (Bret Busby): > Whilst this computer that I am using, has about ten USB sockets (including > four on the front), I expect that a similar workstation to this, would be > required, or, a proper server, with all of the required sockets, both > options be

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

Xorg Den mån 11 nov. 2024 kl 14:50 skrev Michael Kjörling : > > On 11 Nov 2024 06:51 -0600, from nickgeova...@gmail.com (Nicholas Geovanis): > > In principle it should be possible with any X-Windows system. But I don't > > know if xfree86 itself can do that, it might require the X display manager

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On 11 Nov 2024 06:51 -0600, from nickgeova...@gmail.com (Nicholas Geovanis): > In principle it should be possible with any X-Windows system. But I don't > know if xfree86 itself can do that, it might require the X display manager > and full X-Windows. Pretty sure Debian hasn't used XFree86 in a ve

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On 11/11/24 20:33, Roger Price wrote: On Mon, 11 Nov 2024, brian mckee wrote: I have a work station. If I put debian on it. I want it to have 5 monsters. I'm guessing 5 "monitors". 5 key boards. 5 mice. So 5 people can long in. At same time. I'm guessing "login".  It's sometimes called Mu

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024, 6:43 AM Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 13:33:08 +0100, Roger Price wrote: > > I'm guessing "version". How about Debian 12 (bookworm). Have you read > > https://wiki.debian.org/Multi_Seat_Debian_HOWTO ? > > Oh. I've learned something today. > In principle

Re: Debian versions

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 03:26:26 +, brian mckee wrote: > I have a work station. > If I put debian on it. > I want it to have 5 monsters. > 5 key boards. > 5 mice. > So 5 people can long in. At same time. > What Verizon should I download Autocorrect is a monitor. I mean, monster. What you're

Re: Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 13:33:08 +0100, Roger Price wrote: > I'm guessing "version". How about Debian 12 (bookworm). Have you read > https://wiki.debian.org/Multi_Seat_Debian_HOWTO ? Oh. I've learned something today.

Multi seat. Was Debian versions

On Mon, 11 Nov 2024, brian mckee wrote: I have a work station.   If I put debian on it. I want it to have 5 monsters. I'm guessing 5 "monitors". 5 key boards. 5 mice. So 5 people can long in. At same time. I'm guessing "login". It's sometimes called Multi Seat. What Verizon should I dow

Debian versions

I have a work station. If I put debian on it. I want it to have 5 monsters. 5 key boards. 5 mice. So 5 people can long in. At same time. What Verizon should I download Get Outlook for Android

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

On 22/10/2023, Max Nikulin wrote: The rmadison CLI tool may query repositories that are not in sources.list. * rmadison is part of devscripts * apt install devscripts * it works like charm * uncommented testing, unstable, experimental from my sources.list [ no need now ]

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

On 22/10/2023 04:32, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: $ apt-cache policy firefox That should help, but it will only provide query results that are relative to your sources.list lines above. To show suites not represented in sources.list, the already recommended packages webpage covers those. The rmadi

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

On 10/21/23, జిందం వాఐి wrote: > On 2023-10-21 18:00, Dan Ritter wrote: >> జిందం వాఐి wrote: >>> * i want to check package versions >>> available in various suites [ stable, testing, >>> experimental, etc.. ] using cli >>> * for example_ firefox >&g

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

be made to work reasonably stably with significant use of apt package pinning, but it would almost certainly be better (certainly easier and more predictable) to pick one suite than to pull in everything and the proverbial kitchen sink in terms of package versions. -- Michael Kjörling

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

On 2023-10-21 18:00, Dan Ritter wrote: జిందం వాఐి wrote: * i want to check package versions available in various suites [ stable, testing, experimental, etc.. ] using cli * for example_ firefox apt can look for versions available in the repositories that you have retrieved (by specifying the

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

జిందం వాఐి wrote: > * i want to check package versions > available in various suites [ stable, testing, > experimental, etc.. ] using cli > * for example_ firefox apt can look for versions available in the repositories that you have retrieved (by specifying the repos in /etc/apt/sou

Re: cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

On Oct 21, 2023, జిందం వాఐి wrote: > * i want to check package versions > available in various suites [ stable, testing, > experimental, etc.. ] using cli > * for example_ firefox As far as I'm aware, the only real option here would be a web-browser (e.g. lynx or elink

cli_ how to find_ firefox versions available in all suites

* i want to check package versions available in various suites [ stable, testing, experimental, etc.. ] using cli * for example_ firefox -- regards, జిందం వాఐి [ jindam, vani ] web_ http://jgfpvd4jhz2fpyuevggr37mqhukv4kw2kpsfii5zygdsgdctqdob3uyd.onion [matrix]_ @jindam.vani:oikei.net

Re: Debian versions

Hi, > Outside Debian there are companies producing operating systems based on > Debian and providing commercial support for those operating systems, > probably the biggest example is Ubuntu provided by Canonical: > > https://ubuntu.com/ > https://canonical.com/ Yet, if at all possible, you should

Re: Debian versions

On Tue, 2023-08-01 at 13:50 -0600, Alan Serrano Peña wrote: > Is there a commercial version of Debian? > Any version with technical support? The Debian project provides the Debian operating system for free and provides technical support for free by volunteers. In addition, there are a number of

Re: Debian versions

Good afternoon, I have a question about Debian versions. Is there a commercial version of Debian? Any version with technical support? No, Debian is a free software, but you can get commercial support from third-parties. I was reading on the website that there is a version called Debian LTS

Re: Debian versions

On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 4:15 PM Alan Serrano Peña wrote: > Good afternoon, I have a question about Debian versions. Is there a > commercial version of Debian? Any version with technical support? I was > reading on the website that there is a version called Debian LTS, > specifical

Debian versions

Good afternoon, I have a question about Debian versions. Is there a commercial version of Debian? Any version with technical support? I was reading on the website that there is a version called Debian LTS, specifically Debian 10 "Buster," but I'm not sure if this version meets

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

Hello, everybody out there! Thank you for your answers. I realize I have not made myself clear, my bad. Indeed, I do not want to change the Python version of the whole distribution: I do not want to mess up the system. My need is to follow the up-to-date Python stable version for m

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

Dan Ritter writes: > You will want to let the Debian python packages alone, and > install new pythons from source in /opt/python-VER or such. Then > use venvs to make sure that you are always getting the python > you really want. There's a tool called pyenv which handles downloads, compilations

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

ement and so on, and you really can't mess with > it without breaking something. > > Install *additional* versions of python3 as you need them, for your own > development work. > > I'll let the Python experts describe how to do this, if you don't already > know how.

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

Yoann LE BARS writes: > Hello, everybody out there! > > For the upcoming two years, I will have to follow the new versions of > Python. Not the preview release, but the up-to-date stable release – > well, I can wait for a couple of weeks after the rele

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

Yoann LE BARS wrote: > > Hello, everybody out there! > > For the upcoming two years, I will have to follow the new versions of > Python. Not the preview release, but the up-to-date stable release – well, I > can wait for a couple of weeks after the release of the l

Re: Follow recent stable Python versions

n of python3 installed, and that this version comes from Debian repositories. Keep the python3 that's provided by Debian, for Debian's use. It's part of package management and so on, and you really can't mess with it without breaking something. Install *additional* versions

Follow recent stable Python versions

Hello, everybody out there! For the upcoming two years, I will have to follow the new versions of Python. Not the preview release, but the up-to-date stable release – well, I can wait for a couple of weeks after the release of the last stable version. As far as I know, Python is not

Re: linux kernel versions in stable

On 2023-04-22 12:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: > There are many signs of a new kernel version in the latest updates: > linux-libc-dev, linux-source, linux-kbuild all show an upgrade > available from 5.10.162-1 to 5.10.178-2. > > Conspicuously absent are any of the linux-image packages; the most > r

linux kernel versions in stable

There are many signs of a new kernel version in the latest updates: linux-libc-dev, linux-source, linux-kbuild all show an upgrade available from 5.10.162-1 to 5.10.178-2. Conspicuously absent are any of the linux-image packages; the most recent ones are 5.10.162-1. I figured they might just be d

Re: Culling old versions of Kernel from /usr/lib/modules/

> the volume occupied by /usr/lib/modules/ (3.5GB) & > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu (1.4GB) - as far as I can tell, this latter > directory only has essential, current files.  I have been using this > volume for over a year, & the modules directory now has over a > dozen kernels fr

Culling old versions of Kernel from /usr/lib/modules/

u (1.4GB) - as far as I can tell, this latter directory only has essential, current files.  I have been using this volume for over a year, & the modules directory now has over a dozen kernels from previous versions of the operating system.  I can see the need to retain the last couple of versio

Re: "(Server) Protocol versions: remote=31, negotiated=31". How to you rsync just certain file extensions? . . .

On 3/11/23, Greg Wooledge wrote: ... > Hmm, that didn't work either. Now it's time to read the documentation. > (read, read, read) > OK, here we go: > > unicorn:/tmp/src$ rsync -a --include="*/" --include="*.foo" > --include="*.bar" --exclude="*" . /tmp/dest/ > unicorn:/tmp/src$ find /tmp/dest >

Re: "(Server) Protocol versions: remote=31, negotiated=31". How to you rsync just certain file extensions? . . .

OK. Let me just discard every single piece of quoted content from this thread, because none of it makes ANY sense. Here is what I see in the Subject: header: 1) Some piece of the verbose output of rsync, for unknown reason. 2) A question about how to do a specific task with rsync. At some point

Re: "(Server) Protocol versions: remote=31, negotiated=31". How to you rsync just certain file extensions? . . .

On 3/11/23, Dan Ritter wrote: > Albretch Mueller wrote: >> The one liner reporting that error is: >> >> time( sudo rsync --rsync-path="/usr/local/bin/rsync" --debug=ALL >> --archive --verbose --compress --recursive --checksum --include="*/" >> --include=".${_X}" --exclude="*" --prune-empty-dir

Re: "(Server) Protocol versions: remote=31, negotiated=31". How to you rsync just certain file extensions? . . .

Albretch Mueller wrote: > The one liner reporting that error is: > > time( sudo rsync --rsync-path="/usr/local/bin/rsync" --debug=ALL > --archive --verbose --compress --recursive --checksum --include="*/" > --include=".${_X}" --exclude="*" --prune-empty-dirs "${_SRC}" > "${_DST}" 1> "${_LOG

"(Server) Protocol versions: remote=31, negotiated=31". How to you rsync just certain file extensions? . . .

The one liner reporting that error is: time( sudo rsync --rsync-path="/usr/local/bin/rsync" --debug=ALL --archive --verbose --compress --recursive --checksum --include="*/" --include=".${_X}" --exclude="*" --prune-empty-dirs "${_SRC}" "${_DST}" 1> "${_LOG_FL}" 2> "${_ERRS_LOG}" ) >> "${_TM_L

Re: versions comparison

Thanks Greg. Good to know that. regards. On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 9:08 AM Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 08:38:22AM +0800, winnie hw wrote: > > sorry this is maybe not related to debian directly. > > but how can I compare two versions of a package by progr

Re: versions comparison

anation that would cover all of them, but it was starting to develop too many moving parts and sub-clauses for that to seem to be worthwhile in the immediate context.) These versions also don't even display one key component of Debian version numbers that isn't found in versions elsewhe

Re: versions comparison

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 07:42:24PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: > Also, while Debian uses a sane, consistent version numbering system it > is not safe to make assumptions about what non-Debian developers do. The best thing I can say about Debian's version strings is that they are documented. unicorn

Re: versions comparison

Also, while Debian uses a sane, consistent version numbering system it is not safe to make assumptions about what non-Debian developers do. There have been some very original systems used, and developers have been known to change systems in midstream. -- John Hasler j...@sugarbit.com Elmwood, WI

Re: versions comparison

On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 08:38:22AM +0800, winnie hw wrote: > sorry this is maybe not related to debian directly. > but how can I compare two versions of a package by programming? > for instance, v1.24.0.1 should be later than v1.23.99.999. Debian's dpkg(1) command has a --compare-v

versions comparison

Hello, sorry this is maybe not related to debian directly. but how can I compare two versions of a package by programming? for instance, v1.24.0.1 should be later than v1.23.99.999. Thank you.

Re: Package versions in multi-arch

On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 at 15:39, Steve McIntyre wrote: > You've been bitten by a subtle but unfortunately common problem, > yes. In multi-arch systems the versions of packages have to be totally > in sync. But the +b1 syntax here means that the i386 package has had a > binNMU (

Re: Package versions in multi-arch

Mark wrote: > >I have a package installation problem which leads to a question about >how (and if) package versions interact in different architectures. > >My system is an amd64 bookworm system, with multi-arch support and >some packages from i386 installed, to support a vendor

Package versions in multi-arch

Hi list I have a package installation problem which leads to a question about how (and if) package versions interact in different architectures. My system is an amd64 bookworm system, with multi-arch support and some packages from i386 installed, to support a vendor-supplied printer driver and

Subject: OT: for posterity: iproute -- dos program by David F. Mischler: (was: CVE security vulnerabilities, versions and ... )

and probably used it until I stopped using a dial-up modem, which I'm guessing was well after 2000 -- I might have some clues somewhere in various notes, but I don't want to go looking for them at the moment. At some point, version 1.10 was released (that may have been the last relea

Re: texlive-binaries depends on 2 versions of a library

-- Sent with Tutanota, the secure & ad-free mailbox. 10 Feb 2022, 01:51 by u...@isnogud.escape.de: > To me this looks somewhat surprising that in Debian buster a package > depends on 2 versions of a library: > > # apt-cache depends texlive-binaries |grep lua > D

Re: texlive-binaries depends on 2 versions of a library

On Wed 09 Feb 2022 at 16:51:54 (+0100), Urs Thuermann wrote: > To me this looks somewhat surprising that in Debian buster a package > depends on 2 versions of a library: > > # apt-cache depends texlive-binaries |grep lua > Depends: libtexlua52 > Depends: libtexlua52 >

Re: texlive-binaries depends on 2 versions of a library

On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 04:51:54PM +0100, Urs Thuermann wrote: > To me this looks somewhat surprising that in Debian buster a package > depends on 2 versions of a library: > > # apt-cache depends texlive-binaries |grep lua > Depends: libtexlua52 > Depends: libtexlua52 >

texlive-binaries depends on 2 versions of a library

To me this looks somewhat surprising that in Debian buster a package depends on 2 versions of a library: # apt-cache depends texlive-binaries |grep lua Depends: libtexlua52 Depends: libtexlua52 Depends: libtexlua53 Depends: libtexlua53 Depends: libtexluajit2 Depends: libtexluajit2

Re: question about different software versions on Debian 10 and 11

On Mi, 08 dec 21, 22:24:41, Stanislav Vlasov wrote: > > 3) you may set repos from debian 11 and install software AND > dependencies - your debian will be partially upgraded and some another > soft may be broken. Don't recommend this way, system may be broken and > need reinstall in worst case. If

Re: question about different software versions on Debian 10 and 11

That's all right. thank you. On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 1:25 AM Stanislav Vlasov wrote: > 2021-12-08 15:51 GMT+05:00, Piper H : > > On Debian 10, can I force install the software which is released on > Debian > > 11? > > For example, a given software has default installation version 1.0 for > > debi

Re: question about different software versions on Debian 10 and 11

2021-12-08 15:51 GMT+05:00, Piper H : > On Debian 10, can I force install the software which is released on Debian > 11? > For example, a given software has default installation version 1.0 for > debian 10, but has version 2.0 for debian 11. > I want to use the version 2.0 on debian 10, how will I

Re: question about different software versions on Debian 10 and 11

do it? A few packages have advanced versions available through the backports repository, but by no means all. So in general, upgrade to Debian 11. -dsr-

question about different software versions on Debian 10 and 11

On Debian 10, can I force install the software which is released on Debian 11? For example, a given software has default installation version 1.0 for debian 10, but has version 2.0 for debian 11. I want to use the version 2.0 on debian 10, how will I do it? Thank you. Piper

Re: Install older versions of Debian with WSL

On 12/7/2021 5:15 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 03:54:37PM +0100, Max Nadig wrote: Hi, I was trying to install Debian 10 via WSL on windows. The problem is, I automatically get v11 Bullseye. Is there some way to specify the version or load a custom Debian version with W

Re: Install older versions of Debian with WSL

On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 03:54:37PM +0100, Max Nadig wrote: > Hi, > > I was trying to install Debian 10 via WSL on windows. The problem is, I > automatically get v11 Bullseye. > Is there some way to specify the version or load a custom Debian version with > WSL? > > I already posted this questio

Install older versions of Debian with WSL

Hi, I was trying to install Debian 10 via WSL on windows. The problem is, I automatically get v11 Bullseye. Is there some way to specify the version or load a custom Debian version with WSL? I already posted this question into the WSL Git repo. So far I couldn't find a solution for this. https

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Mi, 15 sep 21, 09:54:29, John Hasler wrote: > The Wanderer writes: > > In theory you could, but in practice it would break well before that. > > I run Sid on my desktop. It's been years since I've had any breakage. > I suspect that it's because I run FVWM, avoid anything connected with > freed

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On 9/15/2021 6:45 AM, Brian wrote > I was also rather hoping Tanstaafl would contribute a few words on how > the unstable model contrasts with Gentoo's rolling release model. Well, it's been many years, but basically, you could select what 'branch' you were on using keywords (stable, testing, etc)

Re: LTS versions - confusion

The Wanderer writes: > In theory you could, but in practice it would break well before that. I run Sid on my desktop. It's been years since I've had any breakage. I suspect that it's because I run FVWM, avoid anything connected with freedesktop.org or Gnome, and am careful about when to upgrade.

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On 2021-09-14, Brian wrote: >> >> Hmmm... ok, so, I could run sid 'forever', as long as I keep it updated >> regularly? > > Why not? Update when you want to. How does this differ from Gentoo's > rolling release aspect? Go for testing if you want to be a little > conservative? > >> Anyone do thi

Re: LTS versions - confusion

does.) > > I am in agreement with what you say as regards stable vs unstable. > For the avoidance of doubt, I would always advise stable for a user. > It has been thoroughly tested, gets timely security upgrades and is > supported by the images team with point releases. What is the

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Tue 14 Sep 2021 at 22:42:12 -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > On 2021-09-14 at 16:33, Tanstaafl wrote: > > > On 9/13/2021 11:02 AM, Brian wrote > > > >> On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I

Re: LTS versions - confusion

; started running a stable install in paralel (shared /home, which brought > its own set of complexity). > I feel for you. It's worth thinking that sid is where you'll get package churn, packages built with different compilers / libc versions potentially, churn of desktop packag

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Ma, 14 sep 21, 16:33:55, Tanstaafl wrote: > > Hmmm... ok, so, I could run sid 'forever', as long as I keep it updated > regularly? Technically, yes. > Anyone do this for important (maybe not 'mission critical') servers? I used to run sid as the main system on my daily driver laptop. Having

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Ma, 14 sep 21, 23:18:48, Brian wrote: > On Tue 14 Sep 2021 at 16:33:55 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > > > > Hmmm... ok, so, I could run sid 'forever', as long as I keep it updated > > regularly? > > Why not? Update when you want to. How does this differ from Gentoo's > rolling release aspect? Go fo

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 04:33:55PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 9/13/2021 11:02 AM, Brian wrote > > On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want to set > >> up, but it depends... > >> > >> I'm a form

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On 2021-09-14 at 16:33, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 9/13/2021 11:02 AM, Brian wrote > >> On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want >>> to set up, but it depends... >>> >>> I'm a former Gentoo user, and

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Tue 14 Sep 2021 at 16:33:55 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 9/13/2021 11:02 AM, Brian wrote > > On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want to set > >> up, but it depends... > >> > >> I'm a former

Re: LTS versions - confusion

Greg Wooledge wrote: >> Anyone do this for important (maybe not 'mission critical') servers? > > I'm sure someone does, but it's not *wise*. yes indeed. server + sid is contradicting somehow unless you do development of server software -- FCD6 3719 0FFB F1BF 38EA 4727 5348 5F1F DCFE BCB0

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 04:33:55PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > Hmmm... ok, so, I could run sid 'forever', as long as I keep it updated > regularly? > > Anyone do this for important (maybe not 'mission critical') servers? I'm sure someone does, but it's not *wise*.

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On 9/13/2021 11:02 AM, Brian wrote > On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want to set >> up, but it depends... >> >> I'm a former Gentoo user, and really appreciated the rolling release >> aspect, since i

Re: LTS versions - confusion

Hi, 14 sept. 2021, 16:35 de amaca...@einval.com: > Debian 11 - Bullseye - released on 14th July 2021 will have [at least] five > years > support as stable/oldstable. > > Three years between releases > ~ two years ;) > plus a year after the next release plus usually > two years LTS support after

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 02:33:23AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Lu, 13 sep 21, 10:18:54, Tanstaafl wrote: > > > > I'm a former Gentoo user, and really appreciated the rolling release > > aspect, since it meant no huge jumps between LTS releases with other > > distros. > Debian 11 - Bullseye

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Lu, 13 sep 21, 10:18:54, Tanstaafl wrote: > > I'm a former Gentoo user, and really appreciated the rolling release > aspect, since it meant no huge jumps between LTS releases with other > distros. You already received good answers for your questions, so I'll just add that one of Debian's stre

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 10:58:26AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > 6) After that year, the release goes into "long-term support" mode, and >received security bug fix support from a different team. The LTS >team may choose to support only server packages, not desktop packages. > A slight

Re: LTS versions - confusion

On Mon 13 Sep 2021 at 10:18:54 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > Hello, > > So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want to set > up, but it depends... > > I'm a former Gentoo user, and really appreciated the rolling release > aspect, since it meant no huge jumps between LTS releases

Re: LTS versions - confusion

and when will > the next one be released, and what will be its EOL? Debian doesn't have "LTS versions" in the way you're thinking. Every Debian release goes through the same lifecycle: 1) Prior to release, a given version undergoes a period as "testing". Use

Re: LTS versions - confusion

> > So... what is the current LTS version and when is its EOL, and when will > the next one be released, and what will be its EOL? > In Debian world "stable" version created every several years, so you can move from one stable to another. Here is info about

LTS versions - confusion

Hello, So, I'm considering Debian for a new homebrew MX gateway I want to set up, but it depends... I'm a former Gentoo user, and really appreciated the rolling release aspect, since it meant no huge jumps between LTS releases with other distros. So... what is the current LTS version and when is

Re: installing two versions of a user application

On 2021-04-23 at 17:26 +0100, Morgan Read wrote: > Is there any method to allow v4 and v5 to be both installed together? Both packages have the same name, so the package manager treats them as the same. Rename the package name of the old version (e.g. to master- pdf-editor-4) and you should be fin

Re: installing two versions of a user application

On 23/04/2021 6:20 pm, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I suggest you look inside those .deb files: they seem to both name the > package they install `master-pdf-editor` but dpkg does not allow > installing different versions of a given package at the same time. > So you'll need to edi

Re: installing two versions of a user application

> You probably want to look inside the control archives rather than the > data archives: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deb_%28file_format%29 > > If both control archive files are using a package name of > "master-pdf-editor", you can try Stefan's suggestion of renaming one > and seeing if they'

Re: installing two versions of a user application

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 18:48:13 +0100 Morgan Read wrote: > On 23/04/2021 6:20 pm, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > I suggest you look inside those .deb files: they seem to both name the > > package they install `master-pdf-editor` but dpkg does not allow > > installing differen

Re: installing two versions of a user application

install removed it. > > The packages that Code Industry provides are clearly designed to get rid > of v4, obviously because they now want people to buy those features. > However, installing v4 over v5 never used to remove v5... > > So, I wonder if alien might have done something

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >