On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 12:39:01PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 12:11:23PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > I certainly *never* asked xdm to be held back, nor icewm, yet > when I started an interactive aptitude session just now, > they were on the list of held-back packages, and their > installed version numbers were significantly behind the current > sarge ones. Perhaps that's relevant??? > > Aptitude didn't complain about any potential broken dependencies, > so I went ahead and typed +. I wonder why dist-upgrade didn't > update them. > > There appears to be a large collection of other, similarly held back > packages. I'll get to them next.
Got to them. Explicitly requested a few packages, did "U" in aptitude twice, explicitly installed and recofigured gdm to be my display manager, and still didn't get to successfully log in. One minutes after logging in, a message came up on the screen warning me that my session had lasted less than ten seconds. Used gdm to switch to icewm (which I had thought was default, and everything worked. The system even seems faster than it was under woody, yes, using icewm too. -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
