On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 6:14 PM Sylvain Faivre wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On a Debian Stretch server with the security repo enabled, I have an error
> today when trying to install zsh :
>The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> zsh : Depends: zsh-common (= 5.3.1-4) but 5.3.1-4+
On Ma, 01 dec 20, 18:14:47, Sylvain Faivre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On a Debian Stretch server with the security repo enabled, I have an error
> today when trying to install zsh :
>The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> zsh : Depends: zsh-common (= 5.3.1-4) but 5.3.1-4+deb9u4
Hello,
On a Debian Stretch server with the security repo enabled, I have an error
today when trying to install zsh :
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zsh : Depends: zsh-common (= 5.3.1-4) but 5.3.1-4+deb9u4 is to be
installed
This is caused by the security repo havin
See the message "all shell packages missing contact you distribution"
after latest update of debian testing. This is right before the
plasmashell should start.
It seems to be also be a bug in kubuntu:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plasma-desktop/+bug/1576500
Only used
On Tuesday 08 March 2016 10:07:35 Haines Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 12:46:14PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > It sounds as though your Jessie is being identified as Wheezy.
> > > > > You get that warning with Wheezy, even if it is 64bit Wheezy
> > > > > with 64bit Google-Chrome. Pr
On Tuesday 08 March 2016 15:07:35 Haines Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 12:46:14PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > It sounds as though your Jessie is being identified as Wheezy.
> > > > > You get that warning with Wheezy, even if it is 64bit Wheezy
> > > > > with 64bit Google-Chrome. Pre
On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 12:46:14PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > It sounds as though your Jessie is being identified as Wheezy.
> > > > You get that warning with Wheezy, even if it is 64bit Wheezy
> > > > with 64bit Google-Chrome. Presumably because Google hasn't
> > > > written a string of dif
On Monday 07 March 2016 18:29:50 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Monday 07 March 2016 17:14:40 Haines Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 02:54:22PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > On Monday 07 March 2016 00:30:44 Haines Brown wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:43:56PM -0300, Martinx - ジェームズ wrot
On Monday 07 March 2016 17:14:40 Haines Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 02:54:22PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Monday 07 March 2016 00:30:44 Haines Brown wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:43:56PM -0300, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
> > > > Correct syntax is:
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > de
On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 02:54:22PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Monday 07 March 2016 00:30:44 Haines Brown wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:43:56PM -0300, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
> > > Correct syntax is:
> > >
> > > --
> > > deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
>
On Monday 07 March 2016 00:30:44 Haines Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:43:56PM -0300, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
> > Correct syntax is:
> >
> > --
> > deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
> > --
> >
> > On 6 March 2016 at 20:10, Haines Brown wrote:
> >
> >
On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:43:56PM -0300, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
> Correct syntax is:
>
> --
> deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
> --
>
> On 6 March 2016 at 20:10, Haines Brown wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 10:47:26PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > H
Correct syntax is:
--
deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
--
On 6 March 2016 at 20:10, Haines Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 10:47:26PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 14:34:25 -0500
> > Haines Brown wrote:
> >
> > > I have je
On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 10:47:26PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 14:34:25 -0500
> Haines Brown wrote:
>
> > I have jessie installed on an AMD64 machine, which lacks any desktop
> > environment.
> >
> > I downloaded google-chrome AMD64 deb from the Chrome website and
> >
Reco wrote:
> 1) Locate the line like this in a file inside /etc/apt/sources.list.d:
> deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/
> 2) Change it to:
> deb [amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/
> This warning should go away.
This will only be a temporary fix as the google-chrome pack
Hi.
On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 14:34:25 -0500
Haines Brown wrote:
> I have jessie installed on an AMD64 machine, which lacks any desktop
> environment.
>
> I downloaded google-chrome AMD64 deb from the Chrome website and
> installed by running dpkg -i on it. It works OK. But now I want to add
>
Haines Brown wrote:
> I have jessie installed on an AMD64 machine, which lacks any desktop
> environment.
> I downloaded google-chrome AMD64 deb from the Chrome website and
> installed by running dpkg -i on it. It works OK. But now I want to add
> flashplugin-nonfree for it or, if that fails to
I have jessie installed on an AMD64 machine, which lacks any desktop
environment.
I downloaded google-chrome AMD64 deb from the Chrome website and
installed by running dpkg -i on it. It works OK. But now I want to add
flashplugin-nonfree for it or, if that fails to use it for my
iceweasel. In orde
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:
>
>
>
>
> The following partially ins
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 Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:07:25PM +0100, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Why don't you just use 'stable' if you need a stable distribution. You
> can always manually install individual packages from 'testing' if you
Don't think that works as cleanly as you think due to dependencies not
in stable.
On Sunday 13 November 2005 02:49, loos wrote:
> Em Sáb, 2005-11-12 às 14:47 +0100, Christof Hurschler escreveu:
> > On Saturday 12 November 2005 01:21, Johan Kullstam wrote:
> > > Exactly. I was using "testing" for a while and got tired of losing
> > > when a package broke and wouldn't get fixed f
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 11:37:49PM -0700, Scott wrote:
_please_ trim your quotes. :)
--
Jon Dowland
http://jon.dowland.name/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Em Sáb, 2005-11-12 às 14:47 +0100, Christof Hurschler escreveu:
> On Saturday 12 November 2005 01:21, Johan Kullstam wrote:
> > Exactly. I was using "testing" for a while and got tired of losing
> > when a package broke and wouldn't get fixed for ages.
> >
> > Of course, a savvy user could default
On Saturday 12 November 2005 01:21, Johan Kullstam wrote:
> loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [snip rant against "testing"]
>
> > I just totally agree with you. A little difference, I switch my
> > production machines (stable) to testing somewhere during the "frozen"
> > time (of course using te
loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip rant against "testing"]
> I just totally agree with you. A little difference, I switch my
> production machines (stable) to testing somewhere during the "frozen"
> time (of course using testing real name. I prefer having a manual
> control on the oldstable->
> All this is IMHO. Warning rant ahead:
>
> 1) testing not for users. It is for debian maintainers putting the
>next stable release together.
>
>There is a mechanical aging process which lets packages come over
>from sid. A package could get updated, wait, and just when it's
>a
Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> > Joona Kiiski wrote:
> >
> >>Hi!
> >>
> >>Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing.
> >>I'm must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me
> >>from upgrading because there are many among t
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 11:37:49PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> >>
> >Please do a quick Google search. This topic has been rehashed many many
> >many many (did I mention many?) times over the past few years.
> >-Roberto
>
> Actually it hasn't been "over the past few years".
Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
Joona Kiiski wrote:
Hi!
Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing.
I'm must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me
from upgrading because there are many among those which I desperatily
need and I don't want to start hack
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:17:44PM +0200, Joona Kiiski wrote:
Hi!
Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing. I'm
must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me from
upgrading because there are many among those which I des
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 01:01:49AM +0200, Joona Kiiski wrote:
> > Certainly not. If you want unstable packages, then use *unstable*. If
> > you want to help test the next Debian release, then use *testing*. If
> > you want something that will always work, then use *stable*.
>
> Yes, I've tried
On 01:01 Fri 11 Nov , Joona Kiiski wrote:
> > Certainly not. If you want unstable packages, then use *unstable*. If
> > you want to help test the next Debian release, then use *testing*. If
> > you want something that will always work, then use *stable*.
>
> Yes, I've tried them all.
> * Un
> Certainly not. If you want unstable packages, then use *unstable*. If
> you want to help test the next Debian release, then use *testing*. If
> you want something that will always work, then use *stable*.
Yes, I've tried them all.
* Unstable was a bit too unstable for my taste.
* Stable is fi
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:17:44PM +0200, Joona Kiiski wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing. I'm
> must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me from
> upgrading because there are many among those which I desperatily need and I
Joona Kiiski wrote:
Hi!
Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing. I'm
must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me from
upgrading because there are many among those which I desperatily need and I
don't want to start hacking apt. Wouldn't it be be
Joona Kiiski wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing.
> I'm must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me
> from upgrading because there are many among those which I desperatily
> need and I don't want to start hacking apt. Wouldn'
Hi!
Now for about two weeks there have been many packages out of testing.
I'm must wondering what's the point? Those missing packages prevent me
from upgrading because there are many among those which I desperatily
need and I don't want to start hacking apt. Wouldn't it be better to
have an unstab
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 05:51:24PM -0200, Francisco M. Neto wrote:
> » Colin Watson disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> > It sounds very much like you've been running 'apt-get update' for a long
> > time, so dpkg's available file is out of date. Perhaps there's a
> > possible workaround in tasksel, alth
» Colin Watson disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> > I tried to use it. However, it kept complaining about task
> > packages it could not find (?!).
>
> "Exactly" means an error message I can grep for in tasksel's source.
Sorry, I didn't get your point.
> > I didn't know about lookin
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 03:34:48PM -0200, francisco m neto wrote:
> » Colin Watson disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> > tasksel, as Shaleh said, and it works fine for me. What errors are you
> > seeing, exactly? If you look in /var/lib/dpkg/available do you see any
> > lines beginning with "Task:"? (If
» Colin Watson disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> > It's pretty obvious that the task packages were taken away from
> > woody. My question is: what as left to substitute them?
>
> tasksel, as Shaleh said, and it works fine for me. What errors are you
> seeing, exactly? If you look in /var/lib/dpk
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 01:57:17PM -0200, francisco m neto wrote:
> » Sean 'Shaleh' Perry disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> > Please update to the latest version of tasksel. If it still fails
> > please mail the maintainer.
>
> It is already at its latest version. I wouldn't post any
> questio
» Sean 'Shaleh' Perry disse isso e eu digo aquilo:
> the tasksel package in woody is supposed to work without any of the task- meta
> packages. It was decided that the meta packages was a bad design.
Well, It didn't.
> Please update to the latest version of tasksel. If it still fails p
On 20-Nov-2001 francisco m neto wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> what happened to the task packages in woody? I can't find
neither them or
> any kind of package that coudl substitute them - and tasksel keeps
> complaining about the same task-packages not being anywhere in the servers
>
Hi there,
what happened to the task packages in woody? I can't find
neither them or any kind of package that coudl substitute them - and tasksel
keeps complaining about the same task-packages not being anywhere in the
servers listed in sources.list.
--
[]'s,
I've been trying to get KDevelop installed for a few days now. The
kdevelop.org homepage seems to be offline, and previously when I was able
to connect the .deb file I found did not download correctly.
Installing from tarball, ./configure complains about not finding giflib30
which should be part
Are we talking about HAMM?
> are there some x-packages missing from stable? (xfree86-common and so
> on) if so, when are they going to get here?
*- On 6 Mar, Nils Grimsmo wrote about "packages missing"
> are there some x-packages missing from stable? (xfree86-common and so
> on) if so, when are they going to get here?
>
xfree86-common does not exist in the current stable(hamm) release of
Debian, and it never will. x
are there some x-packages missing from stable? (xfree86-common and so
on) if so, when are they going to get here?
--
Nils Grimsmo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
> [snip]
> >
> > The "Debian libc5 to libc6 Mini-HOWTO says to install
> > libreadline2_2.1-4
> > but I only find libreadline2_2.1-2.
> > I never did find this debian package.
>
> Go to http://www.debian.org/packages.html and do a search for
> libreadline2. Then you'll find libreadline2_
[snip]
>
> The "Debian libc5 to libc6 Mini-HOWTO says to install
> libreadline2_2.1-4
> but I only find libreadline2_2.1-2.
> I never did find this debian package.
Go to http://www.debian.org/packages.html and do a search for
libreadline2. Then you'll find libreadline2_2.1-7.deb (I just
On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, Jameson Burt wrote:
> Does anyone know where I can find the packages "wish" and "tclsh"?
> Are these packages in some developers' directory, since they seem to not
> notice missing dependent-packages?
I belive wish and tclsh are provided by the various tcl packages. tcl80
ce
I see no wish or tclsh packages.
These are required by the Debian hamm package exmh_2.0zeta-3.deb.
I have had this problem with other packages that required dependent-packages
not at ftp.debian.org.
The following packages were missing for gimp gimp-data-min_0.99.14-1_all.de
b
libmpeg1_1.2.2-
On Tue, 3 Sep 1996, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Guy Maor:
> >
> > > pbmplus was replaced by netpbm.
> >
> > Hmm. Perhaps some kind soul can make a debian package?!
> >
>
> Someone did...
>
> bash$ dpkg -s netpbm
> Package: netpbm
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: optional
> Section: no
> Guy Maor:
>
> > pbmplus was replaced by netpbm.
>
> Hmm. Perhaps some kind soul can make a debian package?!
>
Someone did...
bash$ dpkg -s netpbm
Package: netpbm
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: non-free
Maintainer: Jim Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 1994.03
Guy Maor:
> > 2. A lot of packages (e.g. magicfilter) recommend pbmlus which isn't
> > available as a debian package too.
>
> pbmplus was replaced by netpbm.
Hmm. Perhaps some kind soul can make a debian package?!
>
>
> Guy
>
=
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Joey Hess wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > Richard> I taper no longer supported or is there an updated package that
> > Richard> includes it? I kind of liked it.
> >
> > It is orphaned. If you really like taper, you could maintain it. Ther
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Richard> I taper no longer supported or is there an updated package that
> Richard> includes it? I kind of liked it.
>
> It is orphaned. If you really like taper, you could maintain it. There have
> been new upstream releases. :-)
>
> As for
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> I'm a fan of taper myself. I'll take over maintaining it, ok? Didn't
> realize it was orphaned or I would have done that sooner.
>
Yea, I've been waiting for the 6.7.4 release (it fixes some problems us
m68kers have).
Thanks,
Leland
__ Y_ a_ m_ b_ o
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Richard> I taper no longer supported or is there an updated package that
> Richard> includes it? I kind of liked it.
>
> It is orphaned. If you really like taper, you could maintain it. There have
> been new upstream releases. :-)
>
> As for
Richard> I taper no longer supported or is there an updated package that
Richard> includes it? I kind of liked it.
It is orphaned. If you really like taper, you could maintain it. There have
been new upstream releases. :-)
As for tape backups, we have "tob" which most people who tried it s
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Guy Maor wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Hubert Palme wrote:
>
> > 1. The package "taper" recommends ftape. No such package is available
> > in debian. Is it needed?
>
> Both of these packages are obsolete. The ftape utility was integrated
> into the kernel a long time ago.
I
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Hubert Palme wrote:
> 1. The package "taper" recommends ftape. No such package is available
> in debian. Is it needed?
Both of these packages are obsolete. The ftape utility was integrated
into the kernel a long time ago.
> 2. A lot of packages (e.g. magicfilter) recommend p
1. The package "taper" recommends ftape. No such package is available
in debian. Is it needed?
2. A lot of packages (e.g. magicfilter) recommend pbmlus which isn't
available as a debian package too.
Doesn't it make sense to add those two packages to debian?
==
66 matches
Mail list logo
