Yöu can find söme stuff I wanted tö shöw yöu, it is merely amazing, take a
löök
http://purnellventures.com/supporter.php?UE91ZGV2QHBhY2thZ2VzLmRlYmlhbi5vcmc-
Take care, Frans Pop
___
Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-systemd-maintainers
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
> August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
> progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
see
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
> August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
> progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
see
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
> August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
> progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
see
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
> August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
> progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
see
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
> August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
> progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
see
I uploaded a new version of debmirror yesterday with minor changes, but
including one fairly important bugfix (#590667).
Please accept for Squeeze.
TIA,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.d
(No need to CC on replies: I read the list.)
On Thursday 05 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
> If you're talking about user-setup, they are cleared, that the first
> thing I've checked (better done that checking network-console, it seems)
> before sending this mail.
With user-setup the passwords
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:09:13 +0200
Source: debmirror
Binary: debmirror
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:2.4.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Frans Pop
Changed-By: Frans Pop
Description:
debmirror - Debian
On Wednesday 28 July 2010, Stefan Kisdaroczi wrote:
> the file dists/squeeze/main/installer-i386/current/images/MD5SUMS
> didn't get updated on my mirror. The attached patch fixed it for me.
Thanks for reporting the issue. The patch looks correct.
Cheers,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debia
On Thursday 05 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
> > Did you actually check this? The password templates are of type
> > 'password' and thus the value should be in
> > /var/lib/cdebconf/passwords.dat (and thus encoded) instead of in plain
> > text in questions.dat.
>
> Well, you can still db_get th
On Wednesday 04 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
> He starts the installation in front of the computer, sets a password,
> that happen to be its daily-use one.
That's not very smart, is it?
> Then, an untrustworthy colleague goes to the computer, and just
> reads /var/lib/cdebconf/questions.dat:
On Sunday 01 August 2010, Lee Winter wrote:
> > It means that we probably need a few more DD's to look at signalled
> > spam for the debian-boot mailing list through
>
> I disagree. I believe the above fact indicates that we need a better
> communication mechanism for reviewers, rather than more i
tags 590993 patch
thanks
> It would be better if debian-cd was modified to only include the symlink
> for the suite actually specified in the Release file.
The attached patch (tested) implements this.
diff --git a/tools/start_new_disc b/tools/start_new_disc
index cf00344..779f242 100755
--- a/to
tags 590993 patch
thanks
> It would be better if debian-cd was modified to only include the symlink
> for the suite actually specified in the Release file.
The attached patch (tested) implements this.
diff --git a/tools/start_new_disc b/tools/start_new_disc
index cf00344..779f242 100755
--- a/to
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a "grave" issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have symlin
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a "grave" issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have symlin
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a "grave" issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have symlin
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a "grave" issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have symlin
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Steve Langasek]
>> Not only is apt-get now strong enough to handle the cases for which we
>> recommended aptitude in the sarge timeframe (with much better resolution
>> of upgrades, installation of Recommends by default, and tracking of
>> auto-installed packages), but
On Thursday 22 July 2010, Ed Kohlwey wrote:
> If I run this command from another machine on the LAN I get output from
> grep showing "Codename:squeeze", so its clear to me there's something
> misconfigured or broken in d-i.
That's the wrong assumption. Assume there's something wrong in your setup
> Basing on debcommit seems the only correct option to me. Possibly a
> fallback to stripped epoch could be used to cover current cases.
Actually, the best solution is probably to simply rename the tags in SVN to
include the epoch using 'svn mv'.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ..
On Monday 19 July 2010, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Christian PERRIER
wrote:
> > The packages I released were tagged with the attached script,
> > contributed by Joey back in.a long time ago..:-)
> >
> > Apparently, it does strip the epoch when calculating the ta
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 23:11 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > + if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' "$CPUINFO"; then
> >
> > Has this been tested with busybo
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 23:11 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > + if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' "$CPUINFO"; then
> >
> > Has this been tested with busybo
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> + if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' "$CPUINFO"; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall us using it anywhere
else in D-I.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
wit
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> + if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' "$CPUINFO"; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall us using it anywhere
else in D-I.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.or
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 3. The 686 flavour is considered unsuitable for some AMD K7 processors
>
> Problem 3 appears to be due to a workaround for an incorrect kernel
> configuration. The comment on this exclusion is 'May not have SSE
> support', but this has never been a re
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 3. The 686 flavour is considered unsuitable for some AMD K7 processors
>
> Problem 3 appears to be due to a workaround for an incorrect kernel
> configuration. The comment on this exclusion is 'May not have SSE
> support', but this has never been a re
Russ Allbery wrote:
> [...] or between optional and extra, for *any* package?
I must admit that I've never seen the practical value of that distinction.
As to the rest of your message: it certainly seems worth discussing this in
a bit wider context.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-re
Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> This is due to Debian Policy 2.5:
>
> Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority values
> (excluding build-time dependencies). In order to ensure this, the
> priorities of one or more packages may need to be adjusted.
>
> Why is this the policy? Why does
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> So if I had used the one from
> http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/installer-amd64/current/
>images/netboot/
>
> it would have worked?
No. Those are *not* daily built images. Follow the relevant links from the
page I referred to! For
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> So if I had used the one from
> http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/installer-amd64/current/
>images/netboot/
>
> it would have worked?
No. Those are *not* daily built images. Follow the relevant links from the
page I referred to! For
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 21:40+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > I'm not sure what image was used by the bug reporter, but I assume a
> > current "D-I alpha 1" image. The alpha1 images date from mid Februari.
>
> The
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 21:40+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > I'm not sure what image was used by the bug reporter, but I assume a
> > current "D-I alpha 1" image. The alpha1 images date from mid Februari.
>
> The
(Daniel: sorry for the private duplicate of this mail; no need to CC me.)
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 13:35+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > So: as the reported issue is already fixed in current daily built D-I
> > images and as the Recommen
(Daniel: sorry for the private duplicate of this mail; no need to CC me.)
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 13:35+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > So: as the reported issue is already fixed in current daily built D-I
> > images and as the Recommen
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> I need to add such a file, but "svn add" apparently chokes on it:
>
> bubu...@mykerinos:~/src/debian/debian-installer/installer/build/needed-c
>haracters> LC_ALL=C svn add s...@latin svn: warning: 'sr' not found
> bubu...@mykerinos:~/src/debian/d
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I eagerly await Bills view on the proposed change for
> popularity-contest, which I believe i a better place to implement the
> change.
No, it is not reasonable to ask packages to change functionally correct and
policy-compliant dependencies
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I eagerly await Bills view on the proposed change for
> popularity-contest, which I believe i a better place to implement the
> change.
No, it is not reasonable to ask packages to change functionally correct and
policy-compliant dependencies
Steve Langasek wrote:
> This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
handlin
Steve Langasek wrote:
> This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
handlin
Steve Langasek wrote:
> This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
handlin
(Replying to list only.)
On Friday 16 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Please make some effort to understand how things work before making
> > wild guesses.
>
> I've spent an effort over several years to understand how d-i is
> working, but thank you for voicing your concern.
For your ed
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I suspect the change you propose can not be implemented by
> debian-installer, but instead would have to be done by changing cron
> or any other package pulling in the mta package. At least the way d-i
> is designed at the moment.
And on what
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I suspect the change you propose can not be implemented by
> debian-installer, but instead would have to be done by changing cron
> or any other package pulling in the mta package. At least the way d-i
> is designed at the moment.
And on what
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> From the looks of it, exim4 is installed because of a Recommends: by
> the cron package:
>
> Recommends: exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent, lockfile-progs
How exactly did you determine this? I doubt it is cron as Recommends are
not ins
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> From the looks of it, exim4 is installed because of a Recommends: by
> the cron package:
>
> Recommends: exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent, lockfile-progs
How exactly did you determine this? I doubt it is cron as Recommends are
not ins
tag 580508 pending
thanks
On Thursday 06 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> The chapter numbers of the brltty manual have unfortunately changed.
> The attached patch points at its index instead of directly to a chapter
> number.
Updated. I've used a different patch as IMO the text where the URLs
tag 580508 pending
thanks
On Thursday 06 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> The chapter numbers of the brltty manual have unfortunately changed.
> The attached patch points at its index instead of directly to a chapter
> number.
Updated. I've used a different patch as IMO the text where the URLs
tag 579954 pending
thanks
On Sunday 02 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It has been reported that it would be useful to add a link from the
> accessibility to the boot screen section, as the attached patch does,
> since the latter describes precisely how keypresses work there.
I've added the li
tag 579954 pending
thanks
On Sunday 02 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It has been reported that it would be useful to add a link from the
> accessibility to the boot screen section, as the attached patch does,
> since the latter describes precisely how keypresses work there.
I've added the li
On Saturday 01 May 2010, Miroslav Kure wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 10:13:56AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > It's time for another upload of the Installation Guide.
>
> Hi Frans, please consider applying the attached patch (or something
> along the lines), which IMO g
On Friday 30 April 2010, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Add 2010 to the copyright hint on the first side of the manual?
>
> Copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 the Debian Installer team
Done.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl):
> > On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > > OK, I'll add them to the packages_list file after we're done with
> > > the beta1 release preparation.
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> OK, I'll add them to the packages_list file after we're done with the
> beta1 release preparation.
Why wait?
> This way, trnaslators can work on them and, if we happen to release a
beta2, or rc1, these packages will at least have some localiz
Dear Stephen,
On Monday 12 July 2010, Stephen Gran wrote:
> Here's a nickel, kid, buy yourself a sense of humor. The entire message
> was surrounded by giant blinking sarcasm tags.
Actually no, it wasn't. The only really clear clue was the last line.
The message was fairly long and especially t
On Monday 12 July 2010, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > That was something I was looking
> > forward to fixing in the coming weeks.
>
> This is just a rant, no useful information.
Actually, it was a compliment disguised as a joke! I had to read it twice
myself to get it t
On Friday 09 July 2010, Ian Campbell wrote:
> In light of Frans' concern perhaps consider dropping 686 instead of 486?
> I think that will result in 686-bigmem being installed on systems which
> would have previously got 686 (I can confirm if necessary). This isn't
> necessarily a bad thing -- it e
On Friday 09 July 2010, Ian Campbell wrote:
> In light of Frans' concern perhaps consider dropping 686 instead of 486?
> I think that will result in 686-bigmem being installed on systems which
> would have previously got 686 (I can confirm if necessary). This isn't
> necessarily a bad thing -- it e
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> True. Any better suggestions?
No. Not without doing substantial work on this, which I've already
indicated I'm not going to do this release.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> True. Any better suggestions?
No. Not without doing substantial work on this, which I've already
indicated I'm not going to do this release.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> What I've done for now is drop the -486 kernel flavour from the m-a
> netinst. From a test build I've just done, everything fits on a single
> CD again, even with firmware included. If people want to install from
> a netinst onto a pre-686 machine the
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> What I've done for now is drop the -486 kernel flavour from the m-a
> netinst. From a test build I've just done, everything fits on a single
> CD again, even with firmware included. If people want to install from
> a netinst onto a pre-686 machine the
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> The FD can say that someone isn't ready to enter the NM process,
> though, and then provide specific suggestions as to how they can
> demonstrate to the FD that they are ready to enter the NM process.
I'm not disagreeing with that. But that's a compl
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Is it actually OK for FD to "demand" that candidates go through DM
> > before applying for DD, or as part of the NM process?
>
> If the FD isn't fairly confident that someo
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I can't speak for the NM team, but if he was asked to go through DM
> first (and that's what I understood), I could understand that his NM
> application got removed for now.
This is the thing I'm having some problem with in the discussion so far.
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Frans Pop (06/07/2010):
> > The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
> > bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
>
> Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also s
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Frans Pop (06/07/2010):
> > The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
> > bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
>
> Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also s
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Frans Pop (06/07/2010):
> > The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
> > bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
>
> Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also s
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> 5. Fix for real:
> Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
> following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
> choices have been merged together:
> choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> 5. Fix for real:
> Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
> following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
> choices have been merged together:
> choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> 5. Fix for real:
> Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
> following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
> choices have been merged together:
> choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> DMs and DDs are maintainers and in some cases, DMs are also uploaders.
> "Debian Contributor" seems nice enough, as Christoph Berg already
> suggested.
So where would that leave translators, art people, etc, etc. Aren't
they "contributing" to? "Contri
On Sunday 04 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of
> > sync.
>
> Is there some way to get the udevadm settle command work also with
> older udevd versions? Can the protocol be changed?
This is a D-I release management problem a
On Sunday 04 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of
> > sync.
>
> Is there some way to get the udevadm settle command work also with
> older udevd versions? Can the protocol be changed?
This is a D-I release management problem a
found 571939 0.6.3-2
thanks
I can still reliably reproduce this segfault.
Cheers,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> > > NACK. The errors are too useful to suppress.
> >
> > I disagree. The error in question is almost useless. There is no way
> > to see which URL was missing, and the message show up in the wrong
> > location in the l
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> > > NACK. The errors are too useful to suppress.
> >
> > I disagree. The error in question is almost useless. There is no way
> > to see which URL was missing, and the message show up in the wrong
> > location in the l
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Frans Pop]
> > So, one wget results in a 404. As choose-mirror tries various
> > possible suites and codenames and wgets are used for other purposes
> > as well, a 404 is always a possibility.
>
> Sure, but all the
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Frans Pop]
> > So, one wget results in a 404. As choose-mirror tries various
> > possible suites and codenames and wgets are used for other purposes
> > as well, a 404 is always a possibility.
>
> Sure, but all the
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> In Debian Edu, we automatically search for error: in the installation
> log to detect errors during installation.
Then it seems you need to make an exception for this error.
> When PXE installing, I get this one:
>
> Jun 28 23:18:29 main-men
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> In Debian Edu, we automatically search for error: in the installation
> log to detect errors during installation.
Then it seems you need to make an exception for this error.
> When PXE installing, I get this one:
>
> Jun 28 23:18:29 main-men
On Monday 28 June 2010, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote:
> So, I would like to skip at stage 5, the following modules:
>
> - base-installer
> - user-setup
> - apt-setup
> - pkgsel
>
> Is that possible?.
Create a custom udeb that runs before base-installer, does the rsync and
provides the udebs you want
On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
> on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
> a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be
> declassified automatically after thre
On Friday 25 June 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand against *what* exactly you're arguing; nor it
> is clear to me whether you are proposing a different course of action
> than the status quo.
>
> The vote is there and we cannot change the past [...]
I would welcome a new
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [1] Checking installation of packages using apt-install is much
> > harder to do as there are many different calls and failure may be
> > expected in some cases. It also gains much less as their total size
> > is much less.
>
> I believe it wou
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [1] Checking installation of packages using apt-install is much
> > harder to do as there are many different calls and failure may be
> > expected in some cases. It also gains much less as their total size
> > is much less.
>
> I believe it wou
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
> If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsub
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
> If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Maybe, for more corner cases where keepign the cache would be
> good, could we have a low priority option (or a preseed-only choice)
> to *not* clean the cache?
I don't think it has anything to do with user choice or preseeding. Making
this a deb
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Maybe, for more corner cases where keepign the cache would be
> good, could we have a low priority option (or a preseed-only choice)
> to *not* clean the cache?
I don't think it has anything to do with user choice or preseeding. Making
this a deb
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> Any disk space savings are IMO illusionary as the cache will fill up
> again anyway during later updates and any system that does not have
> sufficient disk space to hold a decent package cache will also have
> serious problems during later st
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> Any disk space savings are IMO illusionary as the cache will fill up
> again anyway during later updates and any system that does not have
> sufficient disk space to hold a decent package cache will also have
> serious problems during later st
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary
> to download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason
> and the user has to install some packages manually [...].
Note that the above argument is on
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary
> to download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason
> and the user has to install some packages manually [...].
Note that the above argument is on
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I see no reason for leaving .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives on a
> fresh installation, so let's run apt-get clean before reboot.
This has been suggested and discussed before. IIRC (but I may be mistaken)
Joey has always been against it.
T
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I see no reason for leaving .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives on a
> fresh installation, so let's run apt-get clean before reboot.
This has been suggested and discussed before. IIRC (but I may be mistaken)
Joey has always been against it.
T
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
> > > The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
> > > then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
> > > OK to apply?
> >
> > Conceptually it is OK but why not mov
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
> > > The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
> > > then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
> > > OK to apply?
> >
> > Conceptually it is OK but why not mov
1 - 100 of 20138 matches
Mail list logo
