On 2012-01-27, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
> When `aptitude remove' leaves the nasty bugger behind what is the
> procedure to finally be clear rid of it?
>
You must have some kind of script that's hung, no?.
Whiptail is light as the wind.
If a script using whiptail is a "hu
Harry Putnam wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
> >> None the less, whiptail is still here hogging away at 75-80 percent
> >> cpu.
> >>
> >> When `aptitude remove' leaves the nasty bugger behind what is the
> >> procedure to finally be clear rid of
Bob Proulx writes:
>> None the less, whiptail is still here hogging away at 75-80 percent
>> cpu.
>>
>> When `aptitude remove' leaves the nasty bugger behind what is the
>> procedure to finally be clear rid of it?
>
> # apt-get install procps
>
>
Harry Putnam wrote:
> I notice whiptail hogging cpu and decided to get rid of it and return
> to the package it is replacing `dialog'.
If whiptail (or dialog) is hogging cpu then it is probably off in the
weeds and should be killed. It is simply a small interactive dialog
for scripts
Running Wheezy and kde plasma desktop
I notice whiptail hogging cpu and decided to get rid of it and return
to the package it is replacing `dialog'.
aptitude remove whiptail... offers a few decisions, and I made the ones
that replace whiptail with dialog.
None the less, whiptail is still
Am 2007-11-08 15:36:05, schrieb hhding.gnu:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I have some program which show some dialog by whiptail as UI to users,
> can I use expect to run the program without any interaction?
No.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
M
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 03:36:05PM +0800, hhding.gnu wrote:
> I have some program which show some dialog by whiptail as UI to users,
> can I use expect to run the program without any interaction?
I would think not since expect will also see all the terminal control
codes used to make the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have some program which show some dialog by whiptail as UI to users,
can I use expect to run the program without any interaction?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFHMrxlJo9Njjkvy34RAo0gAJ9WsaqnJcUk1+NQSn9w5sX7+8D
B
> 0.51.4-8 0.51.4-10
> --\ Packages being deleted due to unsatisfied dependencies
> idA whiptail81.9kB
> 0.51.4-8 0.51.4-10
>
> It want's to remove whiptail because of libnewt0.51 (UNSATISF
Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
> Quoting Miernik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I just run apt-get update on the latest unstable, and then run
> > aptitude.
> >
> In my experience, it is a Very Bad Idea (TM) to mix apt-get and
> aptitude. They apparently calculate dependencies and/or priorities
> differently
Quoting Miernik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I just run apt-get update on the latest unstable, and then run
> aptitude.
>
In my experience, it is a Very Bad Idea (TM) to mix apt-get and
aptitude. They apparently calculate dependencies and/or priorities
differently.
Just my $0.02USD,
Jeffrey
--
To
deleted due to unsatisfied dependencies
idA whiptail81.9kB
0.51.4-8 0.51.4-10
It want's to remove whiptail because of libnewt0.51 (UNSATISFIED), and
it want's to remove libnewt0.51 because it is unused.
I'm notre
Eike Lantzsch wrote:
> I'm sure I didn't enter "whiptail" nor "whiptail:" in any dialog.
> But anyway, your answer put me back on track.
> dpkg-reconfigure didn't work because plex86 wasn't completely
> installed. In /var/cache/debconf/config.da
On Sunday 16 March 2003 11:09, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:26:36AM -0300, Eike Lantzsch wrote:
> > When I try to install it with "dpkg -i" I get:
> >
> > Setting up plex86-kernel-2.4.20 (0.0.20011018-8) ...
> > adduser: The user `whip
On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:26:36AM -0300, Eike Lantzsch wrote:
> When I try to install it with "dpkg -i" I get:
>
> Setting up plex86-kernel-2.4.20 (0.0.20011018-8) ...
> adduser: The user `whiptail:' doesn't exist.
> dpkg: error processing plex86-kernel-2.4.2
4.20 (0.0.20011018-8) ...
adduser: The user `whiptail:' doesn't exist.
dpkg: error processing plex86-kernel-2.4.20 (--configure):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
I added a user "whiptail" to the group "plex86" and whiptail-utf8
is installed
Hi:
I am trying to setup plex86 on a i386 Woody box. I compiled the
modules and made a kernel package.
When I try to install it with "dpkg -i" I get:
Setting up plex86-kernel-2.4.20 (0.0.20011018-8) ...
adduser: The user `whiptail:' doesn't exist.
dpkg: error processing
; > > box. It wanted to upgrade about 125 packages, and everthing was going
> > > smoothly until is was pre-configuring (I think) ssh. When it tried to
> > > bring up the screen (using whiptail) asking if I wanted to install ssh
> > > suid, it got as fa
; > smoothly until is was pre-configuring (I think) ssh. When it tried to
> > bring up the screen (using whiptail) asking if I wanted to install ssh
> > suid, it got as far as making the entire screen blue, but never finished
> > rendering the screen.
>
> As far as I
bring up the screen (using whiptail) asking if I wanted to install ssh
> suid, it got as far as making the entire screen blue, but never finished
> rendering the screen.
As far as I know, this is a bug in slang1-utf8. Remove it, leaving only
slang1, and you should be OK.
I recently attempted a large apt-get update then upgrade on my woody
box. It wanted to upgrade about 125 packages, and everthing was going
smoothly until is was pre-configuring (I think) ssh. When it tried to
bring up the screen (using whiptail) asking if I wanted to install ssh
suid, it got as
Hwei Sheng TEOH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Apparently there is some dependency problem around newt0.30 and whiptail that
> caused a cascade of packages to need removal?
This has been discussed on the IRC channel recently. It seems there are
some packages which specify a dependency of &
t-get responded that the
packages ae, gimp, modconf, newt0.30, whiptail would have been *removed*.
Apparently there is some dependency problem around newt0.30 and whiptail that
caused a cascade of packages to need removal? But what I really *don't*
understand is why gimp would be removed. What h
Jim Foltz writes:
> I want to use either dialog or whiptail for some installation front ends.
> What's the difference between these two programs?
dialog is based on ncurses while whiptail is based on newt and slang.
whiptail is (almost) completely compatible and offers a few extension
Hello,
I want to use either dialog or whiptail for some installation front ends.
What's the difference between these two programs? The man page for whiptail
is only a minor rewrite of the dialog man pageq, but I didn't find where it
told the differences between them.
--
Jim Fol
It should be in the popt package in the devel/ section. it is an
argument parsing routine. I found this by using the package search on
www.debian.org. Always hunt there first (-:
C.J.LAWSON wrote:
>
> Hello again everyone,
> I am trying to build whiptail on an alpha and
*- C.J.LAWSON wrote about "popt.h (whiptail)"
| Hello again everyone,
| I am trying to build whiptail on an alpha and the build failed
| with the message
|
| [robin:newt-0.21:<04:23:35 PM>]make whiptail
| gcc -Wall -g -O2 -I/home/me/fx942976/local/include
-L/home/me/fx942
Hello again everyone,
I am trying to build whiptail on an alpha and the build failed
with the message
[robin:newt-0.21:<04:23:35 PM>]make whiptail
gcc -Wall -g -O2 -I/home/me/fx942976/local/include
-L/home/me/fx942976/local/lib -c whiptail.c -o whiptail.o
whiptail.c:4: popt.h: N
Ta Brian,
R.
--
Jonathan Lawson
Thermal Processes Unit
Department of Applied Energy and Optical Diagnostics
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Cranfield University,
Cranfield, Bedford. UK.
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
'They came forth from unhol
*- C.J.LAWSON wrote about "whiptail"
| Hi,
|Someone just referenced a package called whiptail as a replacement to
| dialog .. Could you please let me know where I can pick up the sources? I
| would like to take a look at it also
|
Package: whiptail
Priority: optional
Section: base
Hi,
Someone just referenced a package called whiptail as a replacement to
dialog .. Could you please let me know where I can pick up the sources? I
would like to take a look at it also
Thanks \& regards
--
Jonathan Lawson
Thermal Processes Unit
Department of Applied Energy
Paul McDermott wrote:
> whiptail from the incoming. My question is this how do I get to the
> incoming directory? Does anyone have any ideas in this particular
> situation.
> Paul
>
have you tried ftp://ftp1.us.debian.org/debian/Incoming if it is not there I
had attached th
Paul McDermott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello everyone, I am trying to install modconf but it depends on
> whiptail. Whiptail is not a package. I installed newt0.20 (gave me
> /usr/bin/whiptail) but that did not help. There has been discussion
> abot this topic but n
Hello everyone, I am trying to install modconf but it depends on whiptail.
Whiptail is not a package. I installed newt0.20 (gave me
/usr/bin/whiptail) but that did not help. There has been discussion abot
this topic but no one really knows what to do about this situation. There
was a possible
>
> Go to a site that mirrors debian-incoming such as ftp.du.debian.org and
> get the newt and whiptail that you find there.
You must mean ftp.de.debian.org
>
Joop
--
Joop Stakenborg PA3ABA
Linux hamradio software map: http://huizen.dds.nl/~pa3aba
( === Still under
I should have followed the discussion on the modconf package under the
unstable or hamm distribution more closely but I didn't. In trying to
install the modconf_0.2.16 package I get a message that it requires
whiptail but whiptail is not available. This has been the case for
over a week
On Sun, 8 Feb 1998, George Bonser wrote:
> I am not sure if this is the best place to ask this but I am having a
> little trouble with whiptail.
>
> This does not work:
>
> #! /bin/bash
>
> BOXTITLE="A Title"
> BACKTITLE="Screen Title"
>
>
On Thu, Feb 05, 1998 at 11:21:25AM +0100, Frere Roy wrote:
> I am trying to install modconf_0.2.15.deb but I get the message
> "whiptail is not installed"
>
> I have, however, installed newt0.21_0.21-3.deb which has installed
> whiptail.
>
> Have I missed somet
On Thu, 5 Feb 1998, Frere Roy wrote:
> I am trying to install modconf_0.2.15.deb but I get the message
> "whiptail is not installed"
>
> I have, however, installed newt0.21_0.21-3.deb which has installed
> whiptail.
>
> Have I missed something?
Yes, newt
On Thu, Feb 05, 1998 at 11:21:25AM +0100, Frere Roy wrote:
> I am trying to install modconf_0.2.15.deb but I get the message "whiptail
> is not installed"
>
> I have, however, installed newt0.21_0.21-3.deb which has installed
> whiptail.
With a newer newt release, whi
I am trying to install modconf_0.2.15.deb but I get the message
"whiptail is not installed"
I have, however, installed newt0.21_0.21-3.deb which has installed
whiptail.
Have I missed something?
Thanks, Roy
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubsc
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I went to upgrade and it says the new version of modconf depends on whiptail
> which isn't a package, teh 'i' command shows two different depends though,
> one says newt0.2 (or similiar number) and the other shows whiptail,
I went to upgrade and it says the new version of modconf depends on whiptail
which isn't a package, teh 'i' command shows two different depends though,
one says newt0.2 (or similiar number) and the other shows whiptail, is this
a bug? if not where is whiptail?
G'razel the sh
43 matches
Mail list logo
