Nuno Magalhães:
>
> I don't really notice unstable to be unstable, except when it is :)
> Granted if you upgrade often you're more likely to run into trouble.
In my experience, upgrading daily (or even twice a day) is almost
totally painless. Sure, you may hit a few more bugs on the way, but the
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 15:19, ZephyrQ wrote:
> Anyone had any experience using Sidux and how usable was it compared to
> Squeeze?
I don't really notice unstable to be unstable, except when it is :)
Granted if you upgrade often you're more likely to run into trouble.
For my dai
> Anyone had any experience using Sidux and how usable was it compared to
> Squeeze?
I have both a Sidux and a Squeeze install at the moment. Usability
wise they're roughly the same, though Sidux is generally faster about
getting fixes in place. Neither Sidux nor Squeeze will be a
I keep a fairly vanilla Lenny box to do most of my personal/work stuff
get frustrated when I want to play a newer game and/or upgrade some
software that is requiring a newer library. Usually backports aren't
available and/or too unwieldy.
My question is how usable is Sidux? I've
Hello
Given the on-going problems described here before about my SATA CDROM
drive, I ran Sidux LiveCD and then installed it onto my HDD over the
weekend. My CDROM drive was picked up perfectly. Sidux was running the
2.6.30* kernel, so thinking that that kernel might have better support
for
ion this thing?!? :-| No hurry; it's just annoying.
Surely Sidux should be able to handle hardware I bought last year.
:-( Drat.
I've fought with this thing on a Compaq Evo desktop running etch, an
AMD Sempron running Slack and Sidux, and an HP Pavilion AMD Turion 64
bit. Ideas? W
Incoming from Frank Lin PIAT:
> On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 20:32 +, s. keeling wrote:
> > s. keeling :
> > > Daryl Styrk :
> > > > s. keeling wrote:
> > > > > Hi. This is a nice box. I've installed Sidux' latest on it.
> > > >
On 01/21/2009 12:46 PM, mouss wrote:
Ron Johnson a écrit :
[snip]
Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in Postfix?
In postfix, no. most people don't need cyrus-sasl.
whether there is a packaging "descrepancy" in cyrus-sasl is a different
story. I am too lazy to s
Ron Johnson a écrit :
> On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:
>> I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:
>>
>>http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/
>>
do read the official docs however:
http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html
http://
Ron Johnson :
> On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:
> > I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:
> >
> >http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/
>
> Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in
> Postfix?
*I* would not say t
On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:
I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:
http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/
Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in
Postfix?
--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"I am not su
generic
> >>>
> >>> == generic:
> >>> keel...@newmil.nucleus.com keel...@nucleus.com
> >
> > More clues? Again, this is Sidux on AMD64, HP Pavilion dv4.
> >
> > Jan 19 18:33:35 newmil postfix/qmgr[12263]: 4EDADBC06:
> > from=
s. keeling a écrit :
> s. keeling :
>> mouss :
>>> smtp_generic_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/generic
>>>
>>> == generic:
>>> keel...@newmil.nucleus.com keel...@nucleus.com
>
> More clues? Again, this is Sidux on AMD64, HP Pavilion dv4.
>
&
s. keeling :
> mouss :
> >
> > smtp_generic_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/generic
> >
> > == generic:
> > keel...@newmil.nucleus.com keel...@nucleus.com
More clues? Again, this is Sidux on AMD64, HP Pavilion dv4.
Jan 19 18:33:35 newmil postfix/qmgr[12263]: 4ED
mouss :
> s. keeling a écrit :
> > Hi. I'd rather it ran from inetd.
>
> don't. if you don't have a lot of mail, reduce the number of processes
> in postfix master.cf.
Okay.
> > Jan 16 18:23:21 newmil postfix/smtp[21710]: E2196BBF7:
> > to=, relay=smtp.nucleus.com[66.18.251.14]:25,
> > de
s. keeling a écrit :
> Hi. I'd rather it ran from inetd.
don't. if you don't have a lot of mail, reduce the number of processes
in postfix master.cf.
> These are single user systems,
> intended to be fed via pop3/fetchmail/procmail/mutt, flowing back via
> my ISP's smarthost. I've fought with
Hi. I'd rather it ran from inetd. These are single user systems,
intended to be fed via pop3/fetchmail/procmail/mutt, flowing back via
my ISP's smarthost. I've fought with Sendmail successfully in the
past, limped along with exim* for years, and now Postfix. What're my
most obvious blunders? E
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/07/08 19:07, s. keeling wrote:
> David Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 3:57 PM, s. keeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> "lahf_lm"?!?
>> Supports LAHF in 64 bit mode, which is the closest I could find on
>
> Thanks for your
David Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 3:57 PM, s. keeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "lahf_lm"?!?
>
> Supports LAHF in 64 bit mode, which is the closest I could find on
Thanks for your help. I guess this is an AMD (early) Celeron. :-)
Still, anice machine if a little odd
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 3:57 PM, s. keeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "lahf_lm"?!?
Supports LAHF in 64 bit mode, which is the closest I could find on
google. If you have that, I don't see why you wouldn't have lm as they
should go together, AFAIK.
With semprons you have to be careful if they'll
CPU supposed to be using? I've been testing with
> > Sidux for the moment (2008-06 (?) 2.6.25-10). It refused to boot on
> > their AMD images ("... detected i1586[sic] CPU.").
> >
> > This thing ought to be running an amd64 kernel, shouldn't it?
> &g
Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 2008-07-06 23:13 +0200, s. keeling wrote:
>
> > Hi. I'm somewhat confused and in uncharted territory. I just bought
> > this laptop second hand.
> >
> > Which kernel is this CPU supposed to be using? I've be
On 2008-07-06 23:13 +0200, s. keeling wrote:
> Hi. I'm somewhat confused and in uncharted territory. I just bought
> this laptop second hand.
>
> Which kernel is this CPU supposed to be using? I've been testing with
> Sidux for the moment (2008-06 (?) 2.6.25-10). It r
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 23:13:08 +0200, s. keeling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi. I'm somewhat confused and in uncharted territory. I just bought
> this laptop second hand.
>
> Which kernel is this CPU supposed to be using? I've been testing with
> Sidux for the m
Hi. I'm somewhat confused and in uncharted territory. I just bought
this laptop second hand.
Which kernel is this CPU supposed to be using? I've been testing with
Sidux for the moment (2008-06 (?) 2.6.25-10). It refused to boot on
their AMD images ("... detected i1586[sic] CPU.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:02:13PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2008-04-15 18:35 +0200, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>
> > excellent description. MY wife, whose box is running mostly-up-to-date
> > sid, is annoyed because every few months some program changes it's
> > icon or some bit of its in
On 2008-04-15 18:35 +0200, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> excellent description. MY wife, whose box is running mostly-up-to-date
> sid, is annoyed because every few months some program changes it's
> icon or some bit of its interface layout... another aspect of
> "unstable".
True. Probably stab
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:03:52 -0400
Celejar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:47:08 +0200
> Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The unstable isn't really unstable per say, but it just breaks from
> > time to time because so many changes are added daily. From
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:03:52AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:47:08 +0200
> Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The unstable isn't really unstable per say, but it just breaks from time
> > to time because so many changes are added daily. From time to time t
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 08:34:30PM -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:09:26PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>
> > Contrast that with sid, bug fixes happen fast. It seems, in my limited
> > experience, that serious bugs that get caught in sid rapidly
> > disappear, s
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:16:19AM +1000, Rich Healey wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
...
> >
> > I personally wouldn't run a testing system for regular use. I would
> > run sid or stable (with backports as needed). Of course, YMMV.
> >
...
> Interesting, when you put it like that it does
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:46:26AM +0200, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Joey Hess wrote:
Both of you, thanks!
> > Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >> In your opinion, am I right in my assessment that testing is more
> >> likely to be in an unusable state for longer than sid? (at least at
> >> the
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:27:22 +0200
Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:35:56 -0700
> Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 06:25:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > > The crucial bit that many m
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:47:08 +0200
Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> The unstable isn't really unstable per say, but it just breaks from time
> to time because so many changes are added daily. From time to time the
> dependencies between packages doesn't fit and stuff breaks.
As pe
tforms before entering
testing so this is a very well tested process.
The unstable isn't really unstable per say, but it just breaks from time
to time because so many changes are added daily. From time to time the
dependencies between packages doesn't fit and stuff breaks.
I don't rea
Matthew Macdonald-Wallace wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:04:48 +0100
Michael C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Many swear seem to swear by sidux, though its claim to turn "unstable
into a stable and reliable operating system for every-day usage" seems
at odds with common sense,
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:25:20 +0200
Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you make something a bit more stable!?
More testing?!! :oP
> Just go with testing - it's perfect.
Agreed, I just like Ubuntu! :o)
M.
--
|Matthew Macdonald-Wallace
|Tiger Computing Ltd
|"The Linux Specialists"
|
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:04:38 +0100
Matthew Macdonald-Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:04:48 +0100
> Michael C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Many swear seem to swear by sidux, though its claim to turn
> > "unstable into a st
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:04:48 +0100
Michael C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Many swear seem to swear by sidux, though its claim to turn "unstable
> into a stable and reliable operating system for every-day usage" seems
> at odds with common sense, especially given its o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>> In your opinion, am I right in my assessment that testing is more
>> likely to be in an unusable state for longer than sid? (at least at
>> the package, not system, level)?
>
> No, I don't think so.
On 14 Apr 2008, Haines Brown wrote:
> Michael,
>
> I wanted to put Debian on a new Thinkpad X61s, and to achieve that with
> minimal pain, I went with sidux. I created a USB-stick to install it,
> and it went as smooth as can be. I'm using the machine with wifi.
>
> A
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:35:56 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 06:25:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > The crucial bit that many miss is that new packages don't move
> > > into testing unless they've sat in unstable w
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 06:25:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > The crucial bit that many miss is that new packages don't move into
> > > testing unless they've sat in unstable with no new bug reports for 10
> > > days (I think).
> >
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:09:26PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> Contrast that with sid, bug fixes happen fast. It seems, in my limited
> experience, that serious bugs that get caught in sid rapidly
> disappear, sometimes within hours. Sure there's more churn and
> potentially more opport
Michael C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I'm obviously never going to get a considered, impartial appraisal from
> their forum and IRC channel, so has anyone here tried sidux only to find
> that Testing was better suited to their desktop needs?
I've never run Sid. I do
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:29:19PM +0100, Michael C wrote:
Haines Brown wrote:
Michael,
I wanted to put Debian on a new Thinkpad X61s, and to achieve that with
minimal pain, I went with sidux. I created a USB-stick to install it,
and it went as smooth as
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 06:25:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > The crucial bit that many miss is that new packages don't move into
> > testing unless they've sat in unstable with no new bug reports for 10
> > days (I think).
>
> Or 5 days (urgency=medium in changelog
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> The crucial bit that many miss is that new packages don't move into
> testing unless they've sat in unstable with no new bug reports for 10
> days (I think).
Or 5 days (urgency=medium in changelog).
Or 2 days (urgency=high).
Or 1 day if it's a bad enough problem (urg
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:29:19PM +0100, Michael C wrote:
> Haines Brown wrote:
>> Michael,
>>
>> I wanted to put Debian on a new Thinkpad X61s, and to achieve that with
>> minimal pain, I went with sidux. I created a USB-stick to install it,
>> and it went a
Haines Brown wrote:
Michael,
I wanted to put Debian on a new Thinkpad X61s, and to achieve that with
minimal pain, I went with sidux. I created a USB-stick to install it,
and it went as smooth as can be. I'm using the machine with wifi.
All hitches were simply the result of my ignorance
Michael,
I wanted to put Debian on a new Thinkpad X61s, and to achieve that with
minimal pain, I went with sidux. I created a USB-stick to install it,
and it went as smooth as can be. I'm using the machine with wifi.
All hitches were simply the result of my ignorance. The applications
Many swear seem to swear by sidux, though its claim to turn "unstable
into a stable and reliable operating system for every-day usage" seems
at odds with common sense, especially given its own advice to avoid
dist-upgrades in the middle of "serious work" because "any pa
- Original Message
From: Roby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 8:37:14 PM
Subject: Re: Needs help with Sidux install
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a unique problem involving sidux. I already tried to get help from
> s
eklektik wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a unique problem involving sidux. I already tried to get help from
> sidux users from thier forum but no one could help me. This is why I am
> trying my chances here.
> The problem: When I run the live cd it takes about 3 to 4 minute
Hello,
I have a unique problem involving sidux. I already tried to get help from sidux
users from thier forum but no one could help me. This is why I am trying my
chances here.
The problem: When I run the live cd it takes about 3 to 4 minutes to output a
long text on the screen and after it
55 matches
Mail list logo
