On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, David Z Maze wrote:
> Simon Tod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Knowing what exactly the version is might be helpful. If the
> >> Knoppix people have added an epoch to their version number, APT
> >> would be entirely corre
Simon Tod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Knowing what exactly the version is might be helpful. If the
>> Knoppix people have added an epoch to their version number, APT
>> would be entirely correct in concluding that 1:2.84-mumble is newer
>> than 2.85
--- David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Simon
Tod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > After a hdd install from knoppix 3.2 I tried to
> dist-upgrade to
> > Debian unstable. It all seems to work fine but my
> debian_version is
> > still reported as testing/unstable.
>
> Isn't that what it's s
Simon Tod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After a hdd install from knoppix 3.2 I tried to dist-upgrade to
> Debian unstable. It all seems to work fine but my debian_version is
> still reported as testing/unstable.
Isn't that what it's supposed to be? That's certainly what it is on
this sid machine
Opps. Thought I re-send this with a subject line!
After a hdd install from knoppix 3.2 I tried to
dist-upgrade to Debian unstable. It all seems to work
fine but my debian_version is still reported as
testing/unstable. I've tracked this down to the fact
that a number of packages from the hdd instal
5 matches
Mail list logo
