On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 02:16:09PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:
[BIG snip]
>
> Installing 'flashplayer-mozilla' that is in Debian main will solve the flash
> problem.
# apt-cache show flashplayer-mozilla
N: Can't select versions from package 'flashplayer-mozilla' as it is purely
virtual
N: No
On 15/10/13 08:05 PM, Gregory Nowak wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:40:34PM -0400, Frank McCormick wrote:
After removing some (I thought) un-needed libraries this morning, I
ran into a problem of missing virtual packages.
When ever I now try to do anything with aptitude, I get
this result
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:40:34PM -0400, Frank McCormick wrote:
> After removing some (I thought) un-needed libraries this morning, I
> ran into a problem of missing virtual packages.
> When ever I now try to do anything with aptitude, I get
> this result:
>
>
>
>
&
After removing some (I thought) un-needed libraries this morning, I
ran into a problem of missing virtual packages.
When ever I now try to do anything with aptitude, I get
this result:
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
google-chrome-stable{b}
No packages will be
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 21:11:00 -0500, Brad Alexander wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>> El 2012-02-04 a las 19:31 +0300, Stayvoid escribió:
>>
>> (resending to the list)
>>
>>> > Install the required package? :-?
>>> There is no such package in the tree. It may be connected
An apt-get -f install should go out and get the dependency and install
both packages, I would suspect.
--b
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Camaleón wrote:
> El 2012-02-04 a las 19:31 +0300, Stayvoid escribió:
>
> (resending to the list)
>
>> > Install the required package? :-?
>> There is no su
El 2012-02-04 a las 19:31 +0300, Stayvoid escribió:
(resending to the list)
> > Install the required package? :-?
> There is no such package in the tree.
> It may be connected with the licensing, but I'm not sure.
>
> Where can I download it via wget?
The mentioned package "libmozjs2d (>= 1.9.1
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:50:47 +0300, Stayvoid wrote:
> Hey!
Yay!
> Could you help me to install elinks?
>
> Here is the output:
> http://pastebin.com/aaAjpS5G
***
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
elinks: Depends: libmozjs2d (>= 1.9.1) which is a virtual package.
***
> What sh
Hey!
Could you help me to install elinks?
Here is the output:
http://pastebin.com/aaAjpS5G
What should I do to resolve this dep?
Cheers.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On 07/18/2011 03:36 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
I'm facing some locally used tools that consist of only single files,
such as "mkrdns". I'd love to wrap it up in a .deb, but the dh-make
and related tools seem oriented around software that comes in tarballs
and has Makefile or autoconf or Makefil
I'm facing some locally used tools that consist of only single files,
such as "mkrdns". I'd love to wrap it up in a .deb, but the dh-make
and related tools seem oriented around software that comes in tarballs
and has Makefile or autoconf or Makefile.PL already built into them.
And while amazingly e
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> The first task of a package manager is to ensure a consistent system
> state by enforcing Depends. However, it is also supposed to make it
> easy to install new software; most users and developers want
> Recommends installed, since without them some advertised featu
On Sb, 20 nov 10, 17:22:39, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>
> I end up installing most Recommends, but I do configure my systems so
> they are not installed automatically.
I tend to install Recommends by default and just disable individual
packages that seem useless for me.
On minimal system
In <4ce83c26.7000...@allums.com>, Mark Allums wrote:
>On 11/20/2010 3:12 PM, Javier Barroso wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
>>> I'm unsure whether I have ever fully grasped the whole apt system, in all
>>> it's glory, but why would a recommends ever be automatically
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 11/20/2010 3:12 PM, Javier Barroso wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I'm unsure whether I have ever fully grasped the whole apt system, in all
>>> it's glory, but why would a recommends ever be aut
On 11/20/2010 3:12 PM, Javier Barroso wrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
I'm unsure whether I have ever fully grasped the whole apt system, in all
it's glory, but why would a recommends ever be automatically pulled in?
Wouldn't it give the admin complete control ov
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 11/20/2010 4:10 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday 20 November 2010 02:58:32 Jason Heeris wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20 November 2010 07:58, Javier Barroso wrote:
>
> How can be blocked the installation of a package that is
On 11/20/2010 4:10 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Saturday 20 November 2010 02:58:32 Jason Heeris wrote:
On 20 November 2010 07:58, Javier Barroso wrote:
How can be blocked the installation of a package that is not installed?
Pinning it to a negative number [1]? (I didn't try it)
Thi
On Saturday 20 November 2010 02:58:32 Jason Heeris wrote:
> On 20 November 2010 07:58, Javier Barroso wrote:
> >> How can be blocked the installation of a package that is not installed?
> >
> > Pinning it to a negative number [1]? (I didn't try it)
>
> This will work for a normal package, but no
On 20 November 2010 07:58, Javier Barroso wrote:
>> How can be blocked the installation of a package that is not installed?
> Pinning it to a negative number [1]? (I didn't try it)
This will work for a normal package, but not for a virtual package,
which is my original problem.
Cheers,
Jason
-
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:25:27 +0800, Jason Heeris wrote:
>
>> On 19 November 2010 14:03, Alan Ianson wrote:
>>> Aptitude installs recommends by default. That can be turned off in
>>> "Options -> Preferences -> Dependency handling -> Install recom
On 19 November 2010 18:39, Camaleón wrote:
>> On 19 November 2010 18:17, Camaleón wrote:
> It has to be global in order to affect all package manager tools. If not,
> when a user installs a package by other means, the "tabu" one could be
> also installed and that should be prevented.
Well, I'm sp
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:24:36 +0800, Jason Heeris wrote:
> On 19 November 2010 18:17, Camaleón wrote:
>> Something like having a "global switch" that prevents any of dpkg, apt-
>> get, aptitude... to get a package going through and warns the user
>> about it.
>
> It doesn't need to be global, some
On 19 November 2010 18:17, Camaleón wrote:
> Something like having a "global switch" that prevents any of dpkg, apt-
> get, aptitude... to get a package going through and warns the user about
> it.
It doesn't need to be global, something that works with either apt or
aptitude will do, since these
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:25:27 +0800, Jason Heeris wrote:
> On 19 November 2010 14:03, Alan Ianson wrote:
>> Aptitude installs recommends by default. That can be turned off in
>> "Options -> Preferences -> Dependency handling -> Install recommended
>> packages automatically".
>
> I still want to i
On 19 November 2010 14:03, Alan Ianson wrote:
> Aptitude installs recommends by default. That can be turned off in
> "Options -> Preferences -> Dependency handling -> Install recommended
> packages automatically".
I still want to install *most* recommends, just not quite *all*. So
turning this op
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:55 +0800, Jason Heeris wrote:
> This originally arose from a discussion on debian-live[1] (sorry to
> anyone who reads both lists, but it seemed more appropriate to
> continue this tangent here).
>
> I wanted to block installation of a couple of recommended packages in
> t
This originally arose from a discussion on debian-live[1] (sorry to
anyone who reads both lists, but it seemed more appropriate to
continue this tangent here).
I wanted to block installation of a couple of recommended packages in
the chroot stage of a live-build, while letting all other recommends
On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 01:04:44PM -0500, R Ransbottom wrote:
> Lately I've been using apt. Using dselect to pull stuff
> off the net. How might I browse for virtual packages and
> their real counterparts?
>
> The thought of installing javascruft ^H^H^H^Hipt and such for
>
Lately I've been using apt. Using dselect to pull stuff
off the net. How might I browse for virtual packages and
their real counterparts?
The thought of installing javascruft ^H^H^H^Hipt and such for
browsers lead to this query.
--
rir Live the dream.
--
To UNSUBS
Hi,
I'm wondering how APT satisfies the dependencies a package has on a virtual
package. (Specially, the netsaint package depends on httpd).
On a box I was installing that had no package installed that provided httpd, APT
chose to install the aolserver server package, and I'm wondering why of the
Greets,
So I recently installed debian over a heavily hacked and modified
slackware configuration, after some bizzare set of cirumstances left me
without a /usr/lib directory on the system.
So I installed the 1.3.x version of debian from the infomagic CDs,
and then updated everyth
32 matches
Mail list logo
