In <5in185hijnaa5tsr4sjp5586u3ucbrv...@4ax.com>, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
>>In <47pt7511s56vq779jtfp2ap0059a8m4...@4ax.com>, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>>>mail:~# apt-cache policy php5
>>>php5:
>>> Installed: 5.2.6.dfsg.1-1+lenny3+custom1
>>> Candidate: 5.2.9.dfsg.1-4
>>>
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
>In <47pt7511s56vq779jtfp2ap0059a8m4...@4ax.com>, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>>mail:~# apt-cache policy php5
>>php5:
>> Installed: 5.2.6.dfsg.1-1+lenny3+custom1
>> Candidate: 5.2.9.dfsg.1-4
>> Version table:
>> 5.2.10.dfsg.1-2 0
>>200 http://ftp.us.debian.
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
>Installed packages that are not available in a repository have a priority of
>100. You could pin (by version) your custom package version to 400 or so.
>Alternatively would could put your local packages in a local repository and
>pin that repository to 400 o
In <47pt7511s56vq779jtfp2ap0059a8m4...@4ax.com>, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>mail:~# apt-cache policy php5
>php5:
> Installed: 5.2.6.dfsg.1-1+lenny3+custom1
> Candidate: 5.2.9.dfsg.1-4
> Version table:
> 5.2.10.dfsg.1-2 0
>200 http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable/main Packages
> 5.2.9.dfs
In , Jeff Grossman wrote:
>I am running Debian Stable on a server. The package in
>stable right now is called "5.2.6.dfsg.1-1+lenny3". I called my new
>packages "5.2.6.dfsg.1-1+lenny3+custom1". I have the following
>settings in my apt.conf file in case I ever need to install anything
>from testi
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 14:48 +1000, Jaime Tarrant wrote:
[... snip ...]
> You may, although it is not really essential if you also have release
> preferences configured as above, put the following in
> /etc/apt/apt.conf
> APT::Default-Release "stable";
Bug #97564 is finally fixed in apt 0.7.22,
Jaime Tarrant wrote:
>* Jeff Grossman (j...@stikman.com) wrote:
>> I am running Debian Stable on a server. I downloaded the source
>> package for PHP so I could remove the Suhosin patch. It was causing a
>> lot of problems with my scripts. I have a question regarding what I
>> should call the
* Jeff Grossman (j...@stikman.com) wrote:
> I am running Debian Stable on a server. I downloaded the source
> package for PHP so I could remove the Suhosin patch. It was causing a
> lot of problems with my scripts. I have a question regarding what I
> should call the new packages that I am build
I am running Debian Stable on a server. I downloaded the source
package for PHP so I could remove the Suhosin patch. It was causing a
lot of problems with my scripts. I have a question regarding what I
should call the new packages that I am building. The package in
stable right now is called "5
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 04:56:30PM -0500, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> Anyway, I see that xmms is replaced by xmms2 and that qiv will upgrade
> with libglib1.2ldbl. My only remaining problem is multi-gnome-terminal,
> which is not in lenny.
If you really want to use old packages on modern debian distribu
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:56:30 -0500
Rick Pasotto wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:46:32PM -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 09:42:26AM -0500, Rick Pasotto was
> > heard to say:
> > > There are several packages that, when I try to upgrade them, aptitude
> > > tells me th
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:46:32PM -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 09:42:26AM -0500, Rick Pasotto was
> heard to say:
> > There are several packages that, when I try to upgrade them, aptitude
> > tells me that doing so would break many other packages. For these other
> > pa
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 09:42:26AM -0500, Rick Pasotto was
heard to say:
> There are several packages that, when I try to upgrade them, aptitude
> tells me that doing so would break many other packages. For these other
> packages aptitude says:
>
> Depends: libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0) but it is
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:42:26 -0500
Rick Pasotto wrote:
> There are several packages that, when I try to upgrade them, aptitude
> tells me that doing so would break many other packages. For these other
> packages aptitude says:
>
> Depends: libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0) but it is not installable
>
There are several packages that, when I try to upgrade them, aptitude
tells me that doing so would break many other packages. For these other
packages aptitude says:
Depends: libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0) but it is not installable
However, 'apt-cache policy libglib1.2' shows:
libglib1.2:
Insta
Rick Pasotto wrote:
> Aptitude reports that for several packages:
>
> Depends: libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0) but it is not installable
>
> however 'apt-cache policy libglib1.2' reports:
>
> libglib1.2:
> Installed: 1.2.10-17
> Candidate: 1.2.10-17
> Version table:
> *** 1.2.10-17 0
>
Aptitude reports that for several packages:
Depends: libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0) but it is not installable
however 'apt-cache policy libglib1.2' reports:
libglib1.2:
Installed: 1.2.10-17
Candidate: 1.2.10-17
Version table:
*** 1.2.10-17 0
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
Isn't 1.2.10 >
Pawel Wiecek wrote:
>
> Upgrade dpkg to newer version by hand before upgrading other packages.
> The colon delimits epoch and version number - and epochs were added in some
> newer version of dpkg/dselect (around Debian 1.1 or 1.2).
>
oh okay. my mistake.
Yafcot:atj(*),
mark
--
* Yet another
>
> went to upgrade the packages on the trusty old 386 and after i got
> the list of available packages dselect reported:
This is a feature and you're Yafcot(*)
It's called epoch and you first have to upgrade your dpkg
before you read in the new Packages file... you didn't...
try dpkg --clear-a
went to upgrade the packages on the trusty old 386 and after i got
the list of available packages dselect reported:
-
dpkg: parse error, in file `/var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 13565
package `cdda2wav':
empty value for version
update available list script returned error exit status 1.
-
a
20 matches
Mail list logo
