On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:58:33AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 11:54:24AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > On
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 11:54:24AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > >
>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:27:29AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > >
> > > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:51:39AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >
> > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
> > inside the chroot? I think udev wants a kernel >= 2.6.15, IIRC.
>
> Interest
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 08:57:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >
> > why don't you boot sarge, chroot into etch and install a kernel from
> > inside the chroot? I think udev wants a kernel >= 2.6.15, IIRC.
>
> Actually
On Monday 11 December 2006 14:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > > without either
On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > without either a functioning X or a functioning net. udev complains
> > t
On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 07:38:37PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:04:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, after the mass upgrade yesterday, the system now boots
> > without either a functioning X or a functioning net. udev complains
> > t
On 12/7/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mail
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:40:27AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I tried that, and got a *huge* raft of proposed deletions -- just from
> asking for aptitude to be upgraded.
what did you use to upgrade aptitude? you might want to use something
that thinks its less intelligent to do this. I
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > and tried to ins
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 05:05:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > Sound like what I have seen "as usual" while doing dist upgrades (Debian
> > and Ubuntu). Several a
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > and tried to ins
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:49:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> and tried to install etch form scratch using installer release candidate
> one, only t
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:30:47PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> > available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> > an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
> available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
> and tried to install etch form scratch using installer release candidate
> one, o
After failing to reconstitute my etch system (details abundantly
available on this mailing list a few months ago), I wiped its partition
and tried to install etch form scratch using installer release candidate
one, only to find that lilo crashed when it was trying to make the
system bootable (i
17 matches
Mail list logo