On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:24:18 +0200 Sven Hartge sent:
> >> Knowing what was in your sources.list would save having to guess
> >> what you have done incorrectly.
>
> > This is how it was, a single line in my /etc/apt/sources.list:
>
> > deb http://http.debian.net/jessie main non-free contrib
Charlie wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 23:13:51 +0100 Brian sent:
>> On Sun 05 Oct 2014 at 08:46:12 +1100, Charlie wrote:
>>> W: Failed to fetch
>>> http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/main/non-free/binary-amd64/Packages 404
>>> Not Found
>> Knowing what was in your sources.list would save havin
On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 23:13:51 +0100 Brian sent:
> On Sun 05 Oct 2014 at 08:46:12 +1100, Charlie wrote:
>
> > Just tried it to see how it worked, but it doesn't work for me.
>
> That's because you have done something incorrectly.
>
> > W: Failed to fetch
> > http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/ma
Ric Moore wrote:
> On 10/04/2014 05:46 PM, Charlie wrote:
>> Just tried it to see how it worked, but it doesn't work for me.
>>
>> W: Failed to fetch
>> http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/main/non-free/binary-amd64/Packages 404
>> Not Found
>>
>> W: Failed to fetch
>> http://http.debian.net/
On 10/04/2014 05:46 PM, Charlie wrote:
Just tried it to see how it worked, but it doesn't work for me.
W: Failed to fetch
http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/main/non-free/binary-amd64/Packages
404 Not Found
W: Failed to fetch
http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/main/contrib/binary-amd64/Pack
On Sun 05 Oct 2014 at 08:46:12 +1100, Charlie wrote:
> Just tried it to see how it worked, but it doesn't work for me.
That's because you have done something incorrectly.
> W: Failed to fetch
> http://http.debian.net/jessie/dists/main/non-free/binary-amd64/Packages
> 404 Not Found
There you a
On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 15:21:40 +0100 Brian sent:
> On Sat 04 Oct 2014 at 08:05:26 -0500, John Aten wrote:
>
> > On Oct 4, 2014, at 5:25 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > > Here's everything again, with some comments to explain what each
> > > line does:
> > >
> > >
On 2014-10-04, Brian wrote:
>
> Ok, http://http.debian.net won't write out a sources.list file for you
> but one of its functions is to choose a fast mirror. Amongst the reasons for
> choosing it instead of specifying a particular geographical mirror are
>
I guess everybody knows about this site:
Begin forwarded message:
> From: John Aten
> Date: October 4, 2014 10:10:02 AM CDT
> To: Brian
> Subject: Re: apt update problems
>
>
> On Oct 4, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Brian wrote:
>
>> On Sat 04 Oct 2014 at 08:05:26 -0500, John Aten wrote:
>>
>>&g
On Sat 04 Oct 2014 at 08:05:26 -0500, John Aten wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2014, at 5:25 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > Here's everything again, with some comments to explain what each line
> > does:
> >
> > ---
> >
> > # This is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Oct 4, 2014, at 5:25 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 03 oct 14, 22:17:42, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
>> On 10/03/2014 03:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>>>
>>> It's important you attach them since your mailer seems to be a little
>>> bit too help
On Vi, 03 oct 14, 22:17:42, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
> On 10/03/2014 03:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> >It's important you attach them since your mailer seems to be a little
> >bit too helpful in formating your mails and it's important to for us to
> >see the same files as apt sees them.
>
> I t
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 22:17:42 -0400
Maureen L Thomas wrote:
>
> On 10/03/2014 03:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Jo, 02 oct 14, 19:59:15, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
> >> On 10/02/2014 07:19 PM, Brian wrote:
> >>> On Fri 03 Oct 2014 at 00:15:32 +0100, Brian wrote:
> >>>
> You have a very poo
On 10/03/2014 03:07 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Jo, 02 oct 14, 19:59:15, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
On 10/02/2014 07:19 PM, Brian wrote:
On Fri 03 Oct 2014 at 00:15:32 +0100, Brian wrote:
You have a very poorly /etc/apt/sources/list. Please post its contents.
/etc/apt
On Jo, 02 oct 14, 19:59:15, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2014 07:19 PM, Brian wrote:
> >On Fri 03 Oct 2014 at 00:15:32 +0100, Brian wrote:
> >
> >>You have a very poorly /etc/apt/sources/list. Please post its contents.
> > /etc/apt/sources.list
> >
> >
> I did not see
On 10/02/2014 07:19 PM, Brian wrote:
On Fri 03 Oct 2014 at 00:15:32 +0100, Brian wrote:
You have a very poorly /etc/apt/sources/list. Please post its contents.
/etc/apt/sources.list
I did not see an update file int the
ftp://carroll.aset.psu.edu/pub/linux/distribu
On Fri 03 Oct 2014 at 00:15:32 +0100, Brian wrote:
> You have a very poorly /etc/apt/sources/list. Please post its contents.
/etc/apt/sources.list
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listma
On Thu 02 Oct 2014 at 18:36:04 -0400, Maureen L Thomas wrote:
> Failed to fetch
> ftp://carroll.aset.psu.edu/pub/linux/distributions/debian/dists/wheezy/updates/main/source/Sources
> Unable to fetch file, server said 'Failed to open file. ' [IP:
> 128.118.2.96 21]
Copy and paste
ftp://carrol
I upgraded weezy to the latest 7.6 version. I have not been able to get
any updates since then. I tried to get updates today and this is what I
got instead.
The repository may no longer be available or could not be contacted
because of network problems. If available an older version of the f
On Wednesday 20 March 2013 10:16:32 Andreas Rönnquist wrote:
> >My sources.list is:
> >deb http://security.debian.org/squeeze/updates main contrib non-free
> >deb-src http://security.debian.org/squeeze/updates main contrib
> >non-free
>
> This should be
>
> # Security
> deb http://security.debian.o
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:12:02 +,
Lisi Reisz wrote:
>I have the following problem when updating (or trying to use Squeeze's
>security repository):
>
-8<-
>
>This has been consistent over a period of time, tho' I am not sure how
>
I have the following problem when updating (or trying to use Squeeze's
security repository):
--
Err http://security.debian.org main/contrib Sources
404 Not Found [IP: 212.211.132.32 80]
Err http://security.debian.org main/non-free Sources
4
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Giancarlo Pegoraro
wrote:
>> I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
>> What I get is:
>>
>> gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but 2.28.1-1
>> is to be installed.
>> Conflicts: ne
Hi,
Il giorno lun, 16/11/2009 alle 10.42 +0100, Matteo Riva ha scritto:
> I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
> What I get is:
>
> gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but
> 2.28.1-1 is to be installed.
>Conflic
I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
What I get is:
gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but
2.28.1-1 is to be installed.
Conflicts: network-manager-gnome but 0.7.1-1 is
to be installed.
gnome-system-tools: Confl
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:45:25AM -0700, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:34:23 + Frank wrote,
> > ... update to grub2. ... boot goes nowhere.
>
> FWIIW, the install-grub2-at-update-of-Squeeze,
> test-boot-with-chainloading and upgrade-from-grub-legacy
> process was like
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:34:23 + Frank wrote,
> ... update to grub2. ... boot goes nowhere.
FWIIW, the install-grub2-at-update-of-Squeeze,
test-boot-with-chainloading and upgrade-from-grub-legacy
process was like clockwork on my old IBM NetVista.
Some of the comments in /boot/grub/grub.cfg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:54:44 +0300
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sun,20.Sep.09, 22:34:23, Frank McCormick wrote:
>
> [snip grub2 troubles]
>
> As far as I understand you "fixed" your problem by going back to grub1.
>
> For the archives, to boot othe
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:54:44 +0300
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sun,20.Sep.09, 22:34:23, Frank McCormick wrote:
>
> [snip grub2 troubles]
>
> As far as I understand you "fixed" your problem by going back to
> grub1.
>
> > I also don't see any reference in it to the Ubuntu which I have on
> > h
On Sun,20.Sep.09, 22:34:23, Frank McCormick wrote:
[snip grub2 troubles]
As far as I understand you "fixed" your problem by going back to grub1.
> I also don't see any reference in it to the Ubuntu which I have on
> hda3. Debian testing is on hda2.
For the archives, to boot other OSes on your
I have googled the problem but can't make head nor tail of the solutions.
During today's update on my testing machine I was asked whether I wanted to
update to grub2. I said OK - after the re boot I picked the chain option. The
boot went well, so I ran the update-from-grub-legacy script. Now I am
Marty wrote:
Frank McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
update ?
This upgrade seems to have broken many packages. In my case,
multi-gnome-terminal failed to start, leaving an error message in
.xse
Frank McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
update ?
This upgrade seems to have broken many packages. In my case,
multi-gnome-terminal failed to start, leaving an error message in
.xsession-errors.
Frank McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:23:53 -0500
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
update ?
I am running Sid and IceWm and upon further investigation only
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:15:15 -0600
Hugo Vanwoerkom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
> > update ?
> >
>
> Updated iceweasel yesterday in Sid and that pulled in
> libgtk2.0-0_2.12.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:23:53 -0500
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
> update ?
>
I am running Sid and IceWm and upon further investigation only
certain themes a
Frank McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
update ?
Updated iceweasel yesterday in Sid and that pulled in
libgtk2.0-0_2.12.3-2_i386.deb
libgtk2.0-common_2.12.3-2_all.deb
libgtk2.0-dev_2.12.3-2_i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody notice the menubar missing from apps after the latest GTK
update ?
Cheers
- --
Frank McCormick
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHkLZ9zWG7ldLG6fIRAuRTAKC3WHAFjc1A+CgeG2DQRJUJM2e93ACfYia5
wnx8oLC840
On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 16:57 +1000, Arafangion wrote:
> Arvind Marathe wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >I am new to linux and debian and recently installed debian-3.1 using DVD
> >from a friend. But it seems a lot of libraries or dependencies are
> >missing. I cannot open any molecular viewing packages like
Arvind Marathe wrote:
>Hi all,
>I am new to linux and debian and recently installed debian-3.1 using DVD
>from a friend. But it seems a lot of libraries or dependencies are
>missing. I cannot open any molecular viewing packages like pymol and had
>problem installing other packages. Whenever I try
Hi all,
I am new to linux and debian and recently installed debian-3.1 using DVD
from a friend. But it seems a lot of libraries or dependencies are
missing. I cannot open any molecular viewing packages like pymol and had
problem installing other packages. Whenever I try to install these
packages, I
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 02:17:55PM +0200, Lubos Vrbka wrote:
> hi!
>
> thanks lots of useful information. now the situation with gpg signing is
> much clearer to me. i encountered the same problem while updating my
> other testing boxes - immediately after new apt (0.6.x) was installed i
> coul
hi!
thanks lots of useful information. now the situation with gpg signing is
much clearer to me. i encountered the same problem while updating my
other testing boxes - immediately after new apt (0.6.x) was installed i
could see the same error messages.
i could remove them again by running
gp
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 05:20:03PM -0400, Marty wrote:
> Jan C. Nordholz wrote:
> >Hi!
> >
> >>1) several errors of followig form
> >>Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the
> >>public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY
> >>i used suggestions from
> >>http:
Jan C. Nordholz wrote:
Hi!
1) several errors of followig form
Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the
public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY
i used suggestions from
http://lists.debian.org/deity/2005/08/msg00178.html
to remedy the problem. what coul
Hi!
> 1) several errors of followig form
> Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the
> public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY
> i used suggestions from
> http://lists.debian.org/deity/2005/08/msg00178.html
> to remedy the problem. what could cause this?
hi guys,
today, i encountered several problems when doing apt-get update:
1) several errors of followig form
Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the
public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY
i used suggestions from
http://lists.debian.org/deity/2005/08/
On 7/26/05, Jan Schledermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am getting this sort of messages a lot the last month or two, while
> running apt-get update:
>
> Ign ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org sarge/main Packages
> 99% [Packages bzip2 0] [Query]
> bzip2: Compressed file ends unexp
I am getting this sort of messages a lot the last month or two, while
running apt-get update:
Ign ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org sarge/main Packages
99% [Packages bzip2 0] [Query]
bzip2: Compressed file ends unexpectedly;
perhaps it is corrupted? *Possible* reason follows
Am Mittwoch, 16. Juni 2004 15:03 schrieb Leandro Guimaraens Faria Corsetti
Dutra:
> Em Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:00:11 +0200, J. Preiss escreveu:
> > I wanted to change from kernel 2.2 (Boot-Disks-Download) to kernel 2.4 or
> > better 2.6. Now I've been toold to modify manually my lilo.conf by
> > debco
Em Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:00:11 +0200, J. Preiss escreveu:
> I wanted to change from kernel 2.2 (Boot-Disks-Download) to kernel 2.4 or
> better 2.6. Now I've been toold to modify manually my lilo.conf by debconf.
That shouldnât be so dramatic, which changes are that?
Just remember
Hi all,
I wanted to change from kernel 2.2 (Boot-Disks-Download) to kernel 2.4 or
better 2.6. Now I've been toold to modify manually my lilo.conf by debconf.
But I'm quite sure that if I'd update from a woody-cd to a newer kernel, all
these changes are made automatically. So I'm wondering: where
Out of curiosity i tried blade's boot floppy just to
see wether the module would load cleanly (unlike the
one i built). It indeed does. Boiling my problem down
to: how did he make those modules? I really dont want
to use the modules on the floppy as he himself says
they could easily be compromised
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Last weekend I attempted to update my [small home] server (with a dselect
> update) to the latest version of "testing". I was previously running testing
> but I had not updated it for several months
>
> It failed - disasterously - in that eve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Last weekend I attempted to update my [small home] server (with a dselect
update) to the latest version of "testing". I was previously running testing
but I had not updated it for several months
It failed - disasterously - in that everything started
Yesterday I had a happy machine...
I upggaded to testing, and built the 2.4.2 kernel using kernel-package.
Now apt-get update is broken :-(
I have to run it using runsocks, but I am begining to think that has nothig
to do with the problem I am having. I can use runsocks with ftp and lynx
and get
Stewart James wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> a little while ago I reported I was having problems with running a
> commercial app. This app was netscape console. The setup program was
> segfaulting.
>
> Well after a few headaches etc I eventually got to looking at rpm files. I
> remove the old libte
Hi everyone,
a little while ago I reported I was having problems with running a
commercial app. This app was netscape console. The setup program was
segfaulting.
Well after a few headaches etc I eventually got to looking at rpm files. I
remove the old libtermcap and libc5 that were from deb file
58 matches
Mail list logo
