-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/17/07 07:16, cass iano wrote:
> Michael Pobega wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:38:21PM -0300, cass iano wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I am running Debian Sid for a while now, and have never had any
>>> troubles. Turns out that I have just upgraded t
Michael Pobega wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:38:21PM -0300, cass iano wrote:
Hi
I am running Debian Sid for a while now, and have never had any
troubles. Turns out that I have just upgraded the whole of it, and
xserver-xorg 7.1.0-18 fails to set up.
I had 7.1.0-17 working flawlessly unt
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:38:21PM -0300, cass iano wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am running Debian Sid for a while now, and have never had any
> troubles. Turns out that I have just upgraded the whole of it, and
> xserver-xorg 7.1.0-18 fails to set up.
>
> I had 7.1.0-17 working flawlessly until now, but
Hi
I am running Debian Sid for a while now, and have never had any
troubles. Turns out that I have just upgraded the whole of it, and
xserver-xorg 7.1.0-18 fails to set up.
I had 7.1.0-17 working flawlessly until now, but I'm afraid that I am
going to be X-less for a while now, since I canno
On Wednesday 12 April 2006 2:16 pm, Curt Howland wrote:
> Good thing you had a full backup. The only thing I backup is user data
> (and /etc/*) so I would have had to do a fresh rebuild. Hmm, maybe
> that's not such a bad idea anyway. Flush out those obsolete libraries
> and applications on the lis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
When I saw that it was going to be a doozie with "apt-get upgrade" and
some packages were going to be held back, I decided to use dselect
for dependency resolution. Good thing, there is a dependency error
with some new library so that all (or a whol
Expect for gtk.All things that use gtk (Firefox, Synaptic and Gnome itself) do not run.
News: This problem is fixed with the new xserver-xorg-core update.What went wrong the first time round? And why in the world did it remove xserver-xorg in the first place so that I had to install xorg?
-- —A wat
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 04:30:54PM -0700, Michael M. wrote:> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:> >apt-cache policy shows that xserver-xorg and x11-common just went to> >7.0.10 today (I upgraded yesterday morning) so this is sure to generate
> >a lot of mail... And here is my mail.I upgraded X to 7.0; it
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 04:30:54PM -0700, Michael M. wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >apt-cache policy shows that xserver-xorg and x11-common just went to
> >7.0.10 today (I upgraded yesterday morning) so this is sure to generate
> >a lot of mail...
> >
> >
> I ran Debian Etch for some mo
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
apt-cache policy shows that xserver-xorg and x11-common just went to
7.0.10 today (I upgraded yesterday morning) so this is sure to generate
a lot of mail...
I ran Debian Etch for some months, but about two weeks ago I decided to
switch to Sid. This morning I re
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 11:35:03AM -0400, Rick Friedman wrote:
...
> I decided to restore my system from yesterday's backup. I am up and running
> normally again but am at a loss as to what is causing X to fail upon startup.
> I'm hesitant to upgrade again just to see the messages that appear in
On Wed April 12 2006 10:56, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 02:29:12PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> > On 12 Apr 2006, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > > Anthony Campbell wrote:
> > > >I just did an upgrade of X in Sid. Numerous packages were removed and
> > > >installed (can't r
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 02:29:12PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> On 12 Apr 2006, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > Anthony Campbell wrote:
> > >I just did an upgrade of X in Sid. Numerous packages were removed and
> > >installed (can't remember them all). During the installation a message
> > >appeared
On 12 Apr 2006, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> Anthony Campbell wrote:
> >I just did an upgrade of X in Sid. Numerous packages were removed and
> >installed (can't remember them all). During the installation a message
> >appeared saying that the link /etc/X11/X was being redirected to
> >/bin/true. No ide
Anthony Campbell wrote:
I just did an upgrade of X in Sid. Numerous packages were removed and
installed (can't remember them all). During the installation a message
appeared saying that the link /etc/X11/X was being redirected to
/bin/true. No idea why this was done but the result was that X woul
I just did an upgrade of X in Sid. Numerous packages were removed and
installed (can't remember them all). During the installation a message
appeared saying that the link /etc/X11/X was being redirected to
/bin/true. No idea why this was done but the result was that X would no
longer start. I there
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 10:18:44AM +0100, Adam Hardy wrote:
> apt-get is all I use - there's too much for me to deal with in the GUI
> programs, and combined with a bunch of single-key commands, I find it
> difficult. I use
>
> apt-get install x
> apt-get remove x
> apt-cache search
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 10:47:54PM -0500, Aaron Hall wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Ibrahim Mubarak wrote:
>
> >with all three of them at the same time (apt, aptitude, and synaptic).
> >That's what I am doing now. I started off with apt-get, then I got to
> >know aptitude, which adds a few nice tri
On Thursday 14 July 2005 21:39, Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 01:48:38PM -0600, Jules Dubois wrote:
>> Obstinate trolls lacking the ability to learn or even RTFM.
>
> something stupid it does is obviously a troll
You certainly are a dedica
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Ibrahim Mubarak wrote:
with all three of them at the same time (apt, aptitude, and synaptic).
That's what I am doing now. I started off with apt-get, then I got to
know aptitude, which adds a few nice tricks, and finally went with
synaptic because I tried it and like it. I s
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 05:08:01PM +0200, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> Don't forget that there's more to aptitude than the full-screen
> interface; you can also use it on the command line:
>
> aptitude install x
> aptitude remove x
And then you find that its dependency resolution is different
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 01:48:38PM -0600, Jules Dubois wrote:
> Obstinate trolls lacking the ability to learn or even RTFM.
Yes, every single person that has ever filed a bug against aptitude for
something stupid it does is obviously a troll, and its maintainer is
obviously a god for his Barbie-li
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 09:44:02AM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Of course it's best to always use aptitude if one is going to use it at
> all, but I cannot think of situations where it might be dangerous to use
> plain dpkg/apt.
Because aptitude by default ignores holds placed by dpkg/dselect.
-
On Thursday July 14 2005 9:36 am, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 05:08:01PM +0200, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> >Don't forget that there's more to aptitude than the full-screen
> >interface; you can also use it on the command line:
>
> But aptitude is missing a command like "apt-get buil
On Thursday July 14 2005 2:27 am, Paul Scott wrote:
> Adam Hardy wrote:
> > Paul Scott on 14/07/05 09:05, wrote:
> >> It has never broken my box. apt-get (before I learned about
> >> apt-listbugs) broke my box once and I upgrade packages almost
> >> every day.
> >
> > apt-get is all I use - there'
On Thursday July 14 2005 12:44 am, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Marc Wilson:
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> > > Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work
> > > around it.
> >
> > Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about
> > dependenc
On Wednesday July 13 2005 10:21 pm, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> > Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work
> > around it.
>
> Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about dependency
> resolution different from
On Thursday 14 July 2005 02:05, Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> Marc Wilson wrote:
>
>>Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap,
>>
> Who is this "we all?"
Obstinate trolls lacking the ability to learn or even RTFM.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 05:08:01PM +0200, Roel Schroeven wrote:
Don't forget that there's more to aptitude than the full-screen
interface; you can also use it on the command line:
But aptitude is missing a command like "apt-get build-dep". With this
you can install the build dependencies for a
Adam Hardy wrote:
apt-get is all I use - there's too much for me to deal with in the GUI
programs, and combined with a bunch of single-key commands, I find it
difficult. I use
apt-get install x
apt-get remove x
apt-cache search x
and that's it. But I am a relative newby at the ga
--- Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam Hardy wrote:
>
> > Paul Scott on 14/07/05 09:05, wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >> It has never broken my box. apt-get (before I learned about
> >> apt-listbugs) broke my box once and I upgrade packages almost
> every day.
> >>
> >
> > apt-get is all
Adam Hardy:
>
> apt-get is all I use - there's too much for me to deal with in the GUI
> programs, and combined with a bunch of single-key commands, I find it
> difficult. I use
>
> apt-get install x
> apt-get remove x
> apt-cache search x
Besides replacing apt-get (not apt-cache)
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:23:54 -0700
Jason Edson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/12/05, Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Paul Scott wrote:
> >
> > > Robert Vangel wrote:
> > >
> > >> Paul Scott wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Don't I need xserver-xorg which is dependent on xserver-common >
> > >>>
Adam Hardy wrote:
Paul Scott on 14/07/05 09:05, wrote:
It has never broken my box. apt-get (before I learned about
apt-listbugs) broke my box once and I upgrade packages almost every day.
apt-get is all I use - there's too much for me to deal with in the GUI
programs,
Synaptic is GU
Paul Scott on 14/07/05 09:05, wrote:
with ideas about dependency
resolution different from the known universe, so if you're going to
use it,
don't mix it with any other package management.
It *will* break your box.
It has never broken my box. apt-get (before I learned about
apt-listbugs)
Marc Wilson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work around it.
Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap,
Who is this "we all?" I started using aptitude because a number of
people on this list th
Marc Wilson:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> > Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work around it.
>
> Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about dependency
> resolution different from the known universe, so if you're going to use
On 2005-07-13T22:21:29-0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
> Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about dependency
> resolution different from the known universe, so if you're going to use it,
> don't mix it with any other package management.
aptitude has worked out great for me, so I guess that
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote:
> Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work around it.
Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about dependency
resolution different from the known universe, so if you're going to use it,
don't mix it with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Scott's comments on Re: xorg in sid were as follows:
# Don't I need xserver-xorg which is dependent on xserver-common >
# 6.8.2.dfsg.1-1 and therefore not installable?
Mine did install and it shows that the correct xserver-common
On Tuesday 12 July 2005 10:31 pm, Paul Scott wrote:
> I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
> to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
Installed it on a couple of laptops with no problems. Unfortunately for this
machine, xorg doesn't like my Voodoo5 for
Paul Scott wrote:
I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
xfree86 in all(?) Debian versions has the server isolateDevice option.
I would presume(?) that the Sid Xorg version that also has, the Ubuntu
Xorg has
Paul Scott wrote:
I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
the new open gl packages remove the old ones and thus whole bunch of
programs:
apt-get install libglu1-xorg (or x-window-system-core wich installs
li
Jason Edson wrote:
On 7/12/05, Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Scott wrote:
Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work around
it.
apt-get lets me install xserver-xorg. aptitude doesn't.
I installed xorg in unstable today with synaptic and
On 7/12/05, Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Scott wrote:
>
> > Robert Vangel wrote:
> >
> >> Paul Scott wrote:
> >>
> >>> Don't I need xserver-xorg which is dependent on xserver-common >
> >>> 6.8.2.dfsg.1-1 and therefore not installable?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> i386? http://packages.deb
Paul Scott wrote:
Robert Vangel wrote:
Paul Scott wrote:
Don't I need xserver-xorg which is dependent on xserver-common >
6.8.2.dfsg.1-1 and therefore not installable?
i386? http://packages.debian.org/unstable/x11/xserver-common version
looks fine to me...?
Yes, i386. aptitude here
Robert Vangel wrote:
Paul Scott wrote:
Lorenzo Taylor wrote:
Paul Scott's comments on xorg in sid were as follows:
# I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough
packages # to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
My aptitude removed xfree86 and rep
Paul Scott wrote:
> Lorenzo Taylor wrote:
>
>> Paul Scott's comments on xorg in sid were as follows:
>> # I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough
>> packages # to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
>>
>> My aptitude remo
Lorenzo Taylor wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Scott's comments on xorg in sid were as follows:
# I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
# to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
My aptitude removed xfree86 and replac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Scott's comments on xorg in sid were as follows:
# I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
# to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
My aptitude removed xfree86 and replaced it with xorg. I have h
I see that some xorg packages are now in sid. Are there enough packages
to switch from xfree86? Are there any problems?
TIA,
Paul Scott
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
51 matches
Mail list logo
