On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 11:31:59AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> If a package is uninstallable on testing, is it appropriate
> to file a bug report against it, even though it might be OK
> on unstable?
>
> If a bug report is filled, then people can become aware of the
> problem, preferably before sarg
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 01:20:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> tkirc (not installable on any arch, depends on ircii, which isn't in
> potato or woody)
ircii is now in non-us.
Richard Braakman
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 01:20:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> There's a list of uninstallable packages for both woody and potato
> (sorted by source package) linked from there too. Stats for potato at
> the moment are: (number of uninstallable binary packages by arch)
> * sparc:45
> *
* "Filip" == Filip Van Raemdonck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Filip> IMO there's yet another issue to consider (which brings another
Filip> complication with it): there may be people who will want both
Filip> mesa and glx, if they own a Riva or Matrox + Voodoo* add-on
Filip> board.
/me waves his h
Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >
> > Depends: libgl1 ; which doesn't exist
>
> This exists in CVS. libGL.so.1 is what is used by the latest versions of
> GLX and Mesa. I think the problem was coming up with a sane way to make
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Packages with unknown dependencies:
>
> clanlib0-display-fbdev-dev
> clanlib0-display-ggi-dev
> clanlib0-display-glx
> clanlib0-display-glx-dev
> clanlib0-display-svgalib-dev
> clanlib0-display-x11-dev
>
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000 , Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are
> installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in
> some of the results.
>
> The following packages are not installable (ie,
7 matches
Mail list logo
