Philipp Hahn writes (""apt-get source snappy" pulls Extra-Source-Only 1.1.4-1
in Debian-Stretch?"):
> today I encountered the strange situation, that Debian-Stretch
> officially has 1.1.3-3, but if I do a "apt-get source snappy" I get 1.1.4-1:
Andreas has answered your actual question, but I woul
In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Philipp Hahn wrote:
> Hello APT developers,
> today I encountered the strange situation, that Debian-Stretch
> officially has 1.1.3-3, but if I do a "apt-get source snappy" I get 1.1.4-1:
[...]
> So how can I tell "apt-get source" to pull the "right" version,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:56:07PM -0700, nob...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just upgraded my system (Debian sid with main, contrib, non-free) to
> the most recent unstable version, running "apt-get update" and
> "apt-get dist-upgrade".
[...]
>From what I've been told you should basically onl
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 10:28:57AM +1200, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> The only other thing I did after the downgrade was to "apt-mark hold" the
> packages affected by the transition that I did not want to remove; this is
> my preferred tactic for surviving transitions.
On machines running unstable
Hi All,
As a reference, I undid the last apt command in one (long) line:
apt-get install `cat /var/log/apt/history.log | awk
'/Start-Date/{last=""} /^Start-Date:/,/End-Date/{last=last $0 "\n"}
END {print last}' | sed 's/ \([^ ]*\) (\([^,)]\+\)\(,
[^)]\+\)\?)/\1=\2/g' | awk -F, '/Install:/{gsub(/^
Thanks!
I was thinking about implementing an "apt-get rollback-upgrade"
command, which would also remove any package installed by the previous
upgrade. To be reliable, though, it should also restore any
configuration overwritten by the install. So maybe it is not feasible.
I agree, maybe "apt-mar
On 17/08/17 10:08, nob...@gmail.com wrote:
Using snapshot repositories and "apt-get install packagename=version"
sounds like a*great* strategy to implement a quick-and-dirty rollback
function for apt-get. Do you think it would suffice to analyze
history.log and run "apt-get install" with
- "pack
Thanks you all for the help! I usually do pay attention, and I prefer
sid even given the risks (it's great).
I don't need the machine at the moment, so I'll just wait for the
transition to complete.
Using snapshot repositories and "apt-get install packagename=version"
sounds like a *great* strateg
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:55:59PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Martin Steigerwald - 16.08.17, 23:43:
> > There is no automatic way to undo the action. I suggest you install again
> > by using metapackages like
> >
> > - plasma-desktop
> > - kde-standard
> > - kde-full
> >
> > depending on
Martin Steigerwald - 16.08.17, 23:43:
> There is no automatic way to undo the action. I suggest you install again
> by using metapackages like
>
> - plasma-desktop
> - kde-standard
> - kde-full
>
> depending on the amount of packages you want to have installed.
>
> And then add any additional p
On 17/08/17 09:29, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:56:07PM -0700, nob...@gmail.com wrote:
(Is there any way to undo the last apt-get? Unfortunately, I don't
have all the removed packages still in /var/cache/apt/archives)
Download them from testing, e.g. by adding testing to
Hello Marco.
Please use a mailinglist for user support. This mailing list is for
development topics.
For Plasma/KDE related questions I suggest debian-kde mailinglist. Cc´d.
Please drop Cc to debian-devel on your answer.
nob...@gmail.com - 16.08.17, 12:56:
> I just upgraded my system (Debian s
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:56:07PM -0700, nob...@gmail.com wrote:
> I just upgraded my system (Debian sid with main, contrib, non-free) to
> the most recent unstable version, running "apt-get update" and
> "apt-get dist-upgrade".
>
> Unfortunately, this uninstalled most of KDE, including
> "plasma
Start-Date: 2017-08-16 11:30:15
Commandline: apt-get dist-upgrade
Requested-By: marco (1000)
Install: libx265-130:amd64 (2.5-2, automatic), libc-ares2:amd64
(1.13.0-2, automatic), gnupg-utils:amd64 (2.1.23-2, automatic),
gpg-wks-client:amd64 (2.1.23-2, automatic), gnupg-l10n:amd64
(2.1.23-2, autom
Hi there,
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:12:10 +0100, Michael Prokop wrote:
> * David Kalnischkies [Wed Feb 22, 2017 at 10:28:33PM +0100]:
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:16PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
>
> > > ...it will break existing practices, e.g.:
> > > DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get upg
* David Kalnischkies [Wed Feb 22, 2017 at 10:28:33PM +0100]:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:16PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> > ...it will break existing practices, e.g.:
> > DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get upgrade -y
> > FYI, I would call it a regression.
> That specific invocation can
also sprach martin f krafft [2017-02-23 11:22 +1300]:
> I'm now taking this to a bug report:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/855891
Read the gory details there, the gist is that David spotted my used
of
APT::Get::AutomaticRemove "true";
in the apt.conf.d files. The rest is in the bug report, I
also sprach Jonas Smedegaard [2017-02-23 12:06 +1300]:
> Maybe your ifupdown was flagged as auto-installed, a recent prior APT
> process upgraded to netbase 5.4 (no longer recommending ifupdown), and
> your latest APT process just finished an auto-removal of the no longer
> needed ifupdown for
Quoting martin f krafft (2017-02-22 01:06:24)
> Hey,
>
> I just upgraded a system that had ifupdown from backports.org on it.
> Following cleanup and dpkg --audit etc., I ran
>
> root@cymbaline:/etc/apt/sources.list.d# apt-get upgrade
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tr
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:22:17AM +1300, martin f krafft wrote:
> [...] I've been using APT since one of its first
> versions, and I think "upgrade" has existed from the early days with
> precisely the promise that, unlike "dist-upgrade", it would not
> modify the set of installed packages, either
Dear David,
Thank you for your witty response, and your work on APT. I mean it.
I am quite sure you get a lot of diverging requests and then one
like mine, without version numbers, logs, but CAPITAL LETTERS
instead.
While your points are spot-on, and I especially liked "this is
a proposal, not a
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:16PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:16:27 +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:06:24PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote:
> > > What am I not understanding right here? Shouldn't "apt-get upgrade"
> > > NEVER EVER EVER EVER rem
Hi there,
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:16:27 +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:06:24PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote:
> > What am I not understanding right here? Shouldn't "apt-get upgrade"
> > NEVER EVER EVER EVER remove something?
[...]
> Fun fact: We have a few reports whic
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:06:24PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote:
> root@cymbaline:/etc/apt/sources.list.d# apt-get upgrade
[…]
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> ifupdown libasprintf0c2 libperl4-corelibs-perl libuuid-perl python-bson
> python-pymongo
>
> and indeed, it then went o
On 29.11.2015 19:25, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> The correct way would be to choose a new 'best hit', if either
>> * there is a target release and it matches the release of the package,
>> * or there is no target release
>> and the version is higher than the last best hit.
On 29.11.2015 14:41, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 03:17:47AM +0100, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> One has to do:
>> $ cd test/interactive-helper
>> $ make aptwebserver
>
> A simple 'make' in the top-level directory builds this webserver
Indeed, but somehow 'debian/rules build
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> The relevant testcases are in test/integration/test-apt-get-source.
> There is a test for #731853 that is supposed to "ensure that apt will
> pick the higher version number" of 0.0.1 (stable) and 0.1 (stable).
> However, this works by pure chance, as simply reversing the
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 03:17:47AM +0100, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> Last = Parse;
> >> Offset = Parse->Offset();
> >> Version = Ver;
> >> + break;
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >
> > That 'fixes' this problem while r
Control: tag -1 patch
Hi David,
On 15.08.2015 13:40, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Control: tag -1 - patch
>
>> @@ -387,13 +388,15 @@ static pkgSrcRecords::Parser *FindSrc(const char
>> *Name,pkgRecords &Recs,
>> // See if we need to look for a specific release tag
>> if (RelT
Control: tag -1 - patch
> @@ -387,13 +388,15 @@ static pkgSrcRecords::Parser *FindSrc(const char
> *Name,pkgRecords &Recs,
> // See if we need to look for a specific release tag
> if (RelTag != "" && UserRequestedVerTag == "")
> {
> -const string Rel = Ge
Control: tag -1 patch
On 15.08.2015 02:13, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I believe the explanation is that selecting the distribution doesn't work
> the way that you think it does. It just changes the prioritization used
> for selecting packages to install, which is then ignored by the source
> command.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:13 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The workaround, as you discovered, is to figure out what version you want
> with apt-cache show and then specify it with the = syntax.
Another workaround is to specify binary package names instead of
source package names. Sometimes this is mo
Daniel Reichelt writes:
> when I do 'apt-get source linux' with jessie+sid enabled in sources.list,
> there's no way to select jessie's ksrc version by target release. Neither
> of these work:
> - apt-get source linux
> - apt-get -t jessie source linux
> - apt-get source linux/jessie
[...]
> D
Hi Daniel,
On 14.08.2015 08:10, Daniel Reichelt wrote:
> when I do 'apt-get source linux' with jessie+sid enabled in sources.list,
> there's no way to select jessie's ksrc version by target release. Neither
> of these work:
>
> - apt-get source linux
> - apt-get -t jessie source linux
> - apt-get
On Ma, 21 oct 14, 09:08:26, The Wanderer wrote:
>
> What I think is being asked for (and what I'd certainly like to see,
> anyway) is a way for the user, having figured out which packages they
> don't want removed, to tell the aptitude resolver that and have it taken
> into account in calculating
On 10/20/2014 at 11:59 AM, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 09:32:54AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>
>> David Kalnischkies:
>>> This isn't trying harder, it is trying increasingly incorrect
>>> solutions to the problem because aptitude assumes the users is
>>> not able to e
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 01:34:13PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> cc:ing the apt maintainers to get their opinion on making this the default...
[Disclaimer: I have written the APT part of it. I might be biased.]
Hell no – as this isn't the point of the implementation. It is intended
to help resear
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 09:32:54AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> David Kalnischkies:
> > > Apitude, too, *really* likes to choose 500 deletions rather than upgrading
> > > even a single package to a version with slightly-lower priority (as
> > > defined
> > > in /etc/apt/pref*), but at least yo
On Jo, 16 oct 14, 17:35:09, Martin Read wrote:
>
> mormegil@cocytus:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/00dontbeanidiot
> Aptitude::ProblemResolver {
> SolutionCost "priority, removals, canceled-actions";
I've had better (as in "not unexpected") results with just 'removals'.
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> cc:ing the apt maintainers to get their opinion on making this the default...
aspcud is not suitable as a default solver. It is far too slow and
ignores some aspects people are accustomed to, like a Depends: a | b
installing a whenev
Hi,
cc:ing the apt maintainers to get their opinion on making this the default...
On Sonntag, 19. Oktober 2014, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> > Basically, this boils down to the fact that people shouldn't have to read
> > a manpage about a complex priority scheme in an equally-complex
> > resolver
On Sun Oct 19, 2014 09:32:54AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> David Kalnischkies:
> > Selecting one package in an or-group is a grand example of people not
> > understand their tools although the policy is simple and logic: If it
> > isn't impossible to let it win, the first alternative wins. If
Hi,
David Kalnischkies:
> > Apitude, too, *really* likes to choose 500 deletions rather than upgrading
> > even a single package to a version with slightly-lower priority (as defined
> > in /etc/apt/pref*), but at least you can tell it to try harder. :-/
>
> I shouldn't, I really shouldn't, but w
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 01:20:54PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Florian Lohoff:
> > is it intentional that gnome is removed when systemd is replaced by
> > sysvinit-core?
>
> Please always retry this kind of thing with aptitude, and try to let it
> choose alternate resolutions to the dependen
Dominik George:
There is no GNOME without systemd. This is not specific to Debian.
Florian Lohoff:
Because i - aehm - cant set an icon for my system via hostnamed or something?
As you've spotted, what M. George wrote is ambiguous and unspecific and liable
to be further distorted. This may
Hi,
Martin Read:
> I got sick of "remove half the planet" being the first suggested option, so
> added a configuration fragment to /etc/apt/apt.conf.d that gets a behaviour
> I find more reasonable:
>
Ah. Thank you very much. I'll add that to my generic "all my Debian stuff
should have this" pack
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 20:36 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 05:35:09PM +0100, Martin Read wrote:
> > mormegil@cocytus:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/00dontbeanidiot
> > Aptitude::ProblemResolver {
> > SolutionCost "priority, removals, canceled-actions";
> > }
>
> That looks very use
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 05:35:09PM +0100, Martin Read wrote:
> mormegil@cocytus:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/00dontbeanidiot
> Aptitude::ProblemResolver {
> SolutionCost "priority, removals, canceled-actions";
> }
That looks very useful, thanks!
Bas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 16/10/14 12:20, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Apitude, too, *really* likes to choose 500 deletions rather than upgrading
even a single package to a version with slightly-lower priority (as defined
in /etc/apt/pref*), but at least you can tell it to try harder. :-/
I got sick of "remove half the pl
Hi,
Florian Lohoff:
> is it intentional that gnome is removed when systemd is replaced by
> sysvinit-core?
Please always retry this kind of thing with aptitude, and try to let it
choose alternate resolutions to the dependency chains.
Apitude, too, *really* likes to choose 500 deletions rather t
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:47:41PM +0200, Dominik George wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >but it seems there is some dependency in jessie which makes gnome
> >unavailable
> >without systemd.
>
> It is there because upstream requires it. There is no GNOME without systemd.
> This is not specific to Debian.
*örg
On 16/10/14 12:47, Dominik George wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> but it seems there is some dependency in jessie which makes gnome
>> unavailable
>> without systemd.
>
> It is there because upstream requires it. There is no GNOME without systemd.
> This is not specific to Debian.
No, that's wrong.
$ sudo a
Hi,
>but it seems there is some dependency in jessie which makes gnome
>unavailable
>without systemd.
It is there because upstream requires it. There is no GNOME without systemd.
This is not specific to Debian.
-nik
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a sub
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 08:22:26AM +, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > There were and seem to be good efforts to port apt to rpm based distro.
> > http://apt-rpm.org/
> > You can see how they handled as your guide.
> >
> > Also do not forget to read the source of apt.
> > http://
> Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:32:44 +0900
> From: osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com
> To: rwob...@hotmail.com
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Apt-get question
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:34:27PM +, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> > Hello,
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:34:27PM +, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if there is a manual how to install/port apt-get to another distro.
It is a non-trivial task you are talking ... but it is not impossible
task as I understand if you can figure out which functionality of a
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:34:27PM +, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if there is a manual how to install/port apt-get to another distro.
> I work now on a slackware based distro and maybe I can make a debian based
> distro of it.
>
> Roelof
>
>
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Malte Forkel wrote:
> $ fakeroot apt-getfrom -s "deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian stable \
> main" download debian-archive-keyring
> Failed to open connection to "system" message bus: Did not receive a
> reply. Possible causes include: the remote application did not
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 09:11:03PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 26 juin 2012 21:02 CEST, Philip Ashmore :
>
> > I noticed a few hours ago that apt-get source linux gets me 3.2.21-1,
> > but the I have the "latest" kernel installed which is 3.2.20-1. What
> > gives?
>
> The latest one may no
On Ma, 26 iun 12, 20:02:05, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> Hi there.
>
> I noticed a few hours ago that apt-get source linux gets me
> 3.2.21-1, but the I have the "latest" kernel installed which is
> 3.2.20-1. What gives?
apt-get source will get the most recent available source for the
package, regard
❦ 26 juin 2012 21:02 CEST, Philip Ashmore :
> I noticed a few hours ago that apt-get source linux gets me 3.2.21-1,
> but the I have the "latest" kernel installed which is 3.2.20-1. What
> gives?
The latest one may not be available for your architecture on your
current mirror yet.
--
die_if_ke
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 07:49:24AM +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> > "SP" == Simon Paillard writes:
> SP> Jidanni, could you please report such issues to debian-mirrors ?
> OK, but nobody sees it there,
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-mirrors/2011/07/msg5.html
ike.egr.msu.edu has fix
> "SP" == Simon Paillard writes:
SP> Jidanni, could you please report such issues to debian-mirrors ?
OK, but nobody sees it there,
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mirrors/2011/07/msg5.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 08:24:50AM +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> E: Failed to fetch
> http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/sqlite3/libsqlite3-0_3.7.7-1_i386.deb:
> 404 Not Found [IP: 35.9.37.225 80]
This is ike.egr.msu.edu, now noticed (in Bcc).
Jidanni, could you please repo
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Erik de Castro Lopo
wrote:
> A little while ago someone on this list (I think) mentioned that
> there was an updated mirror script that leads to less of these
> "MS5Sum mismatch" error than the older version of that script.
>
> I am looking for information on this
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Erik de Castro Lopo, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 11:37:29 +1000, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> > > jida...@jidanni.org, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 06:01:14 +0800, a écrit :
> > > > Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
> > >
> > > ftp.us.debian.org is a mirror. Wh
> "AM" == Albrecht Mann writes:
>> Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
AM> Yes you are.
OK, psst... tell me the root URL, I promise I will only use it for
testing. (Hmmm, that's what I told the .TW mirror before I ditched him,
so better not tell me.)
>> E: Failed to fetch
>> http:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:24:50 +0800
jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
Yes you are.
> I have an idea. First put each thing and its checksum into a temporary
> directory, then when _both_ parts are fully ready, move them into the
> staging area for users
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 03:43:19 +0200
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Erik de Castro Lopo, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 11:37:29 +1000, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> > > jida...@jidanni.org, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 06:01:14 +0800, a écrit :
> > > > Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
> > >
> >
Erik de Castro Lopo, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 11:37:29 +1000, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> > jida...@jidanni.org, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 06:01:14 +0800, a écrit :
> > > Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
> >
> > ftp.us.debian.org is a mirror. Which is probably using old scripts.
>
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> jida...@jidanni.org, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 06:01:14 +0800, a écrit :
> > Can't be a mirror issue. I'm not using a mirror.
>
> ftp.us.debian.org is a mirror. Which is probably using old scripts.
Do you have a link to something that explains this problem and where
the updated
jida...@jidanni.org, le Sun 26 Jun 2011 06:01:14 +0800, a écrit :
> W: Failed to fetch
> http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/contrib/binary-i386/PackagesIndex
> MD5Sum mismatch
> W: Failed to fetch
> http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/non-free/binary-i386/PackagesIndex
>
P.S.,
E: Failed to fetch
http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/sqlite3/libsqlite3-0_3.7.7-1_i386.deb:
404 Not Found [IP: 35.9.37.225 80]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archiv
Klaus Ethgen writes:
> Hi,
>
> Am Sa den 5. Sep 2009 um 20:06 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
>> % rmadison apt
>>apt | 0.6.46.4-0.1 | etch-m68k | source, m68k
>>apt | 0.6.46.4-0.1 | oldstable | source, alpha, amd64, arm, hppa,
>> i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, s
Am Samstag 05 September 2009 schrieb Klaus Ethgen:
> Am Sa den 5. Sep 2009 um 20:18 schrieb Hans-J. Ullrich:
> > APT::Cache-Limit "1";
>
> Doesn't help as the limit is hard coded in apt. Just look at the source.
> The problem was fixed in versions after stable.
>
> Regards
>Klaus
A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
Am Sa den 5. Sep 2009 um 20:06 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> % rmadison apt
>apt | 0.6.46.4-0.1 | etch-m68k | source, m68k
>apt | 0.6.46.4-0.1 | oldstable | source, alpha, amd64, arm, hppa,
> i386, ia64, mips, mipsel,
Am Samstag 05 September 2009 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> Klaus Ethgen writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > maybe that is an issue for debian-user, so I put it in the To too
> > although I am not subscribed there.
> >
> > If you look to Bug #497617 there is a long time bug in apt first only
> > targeting th
Klaus Ethgen writes:
> Hi,
>
> maybe that is an issue for debian-user, so I put it in the To too
> although I am not subscribed there.
>
> If you look to Bug #497617 there is a long time bug in apt first only
> targeting the German translations but now it is independent of the
> locales.
>
> When
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:37:38PM +0100, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> maybe that is an issue for debian-user, so I put it in the To too
> although I am not subscribed there.
What exactly do you want to discuss on -devel which is not appropriate
on the bug report or on -user?
That bugs should get fixed?
Joseph Rawson writes:
> On Sunday 21 June 2009 03:33:33 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> > The Release could be signed using an rsign method with the machine(s)
>> > that manage the repository, or it could be done locally on the server
>> > using gpg-agent, or an unencrypted private key, dependi
On Sunday 21 June 2009 03:33:33 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > The Release could be signed using an rsign method with the machine(s)
> > that manage the repository, or it could be done locally on the server
> > using gpg-agent, or an unencrypted private key, depending on how the
> > administrator
Joseph Rawson writes:
> On Saturday 20 June 2009 03:16:33 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> But now you made me think about this too. So here is what I think:
>>
>> - My bandwidth at home is fast enough to fetch packages directly. No
>> need to mirror at all.
>>
>> - I don't want to download a pac
On Saturday 20 June 2009 03:16:33 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Joseph Rawson writes:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 12:57:25 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Or have a proxy that adds packages that are requested.
> >
> > When I woke up this morning, I was thinking that it might be interesting
> > to
Joseph Rawson writes:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 12:57:25 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Or have a proxy that adds packages that are requested.
> When I woke up this morning, I was thinking that it might be interesting to
> have an apt method that talks directly to reprepro. It's just a vague ide
Actually attaching the file this time...
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:54:28AM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 06:23:08AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> >
On Friday 19 June 2009 20:54:28 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 06:23:08AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > > > would be much more interested in making a tool
On Friday 19 June 2009 12:57:25 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Joseph Rawson writes:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 00:27:06 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Joseph Rawson writes:
> >> If so then you can configure a post invoke hook in apt that will copy
> >> the dpkg status file of the host to the se
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 02:14:08PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Joseph Rawson [090619 13:23]:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > > > would be much more interested in making a tool that would make i
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 06:23:08AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > > would be much more interested in making a tool that would make it easier
> > > to manage local/partial debia
On Friday 19 June 2009 07:14:08 Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Actually, I'm quite open to having some depedency handling in reprepro
That is interesting. I've been working on the assumption that there would
never be any dependency handling in reprepro, as I didn't consider it part of
it's function.
Joseph Rawson writes:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 00:27:06 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Joseph Rawson writes:
>> If so then you can configure a post invoke hook in apt that will copy
>> the dpkg status file of the host to the server [as status.$(hostname)]
>> and then use those on the server to g
* Joseph Rawson [090619 13:23]:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > > would be much more interested in making a tool that would make it easier
> > > to manage local/partial debian mirrors (i.e. one that helpe
On Friday 19 June 2009 00:27:06 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Joseph Rawson writes:
> > BTW, the subject of this thread is "apt-get wrapper for maintaining
> > Partial Mirrors". The solution I'm proposing is "a simple tool for
> > maintaining Partial Mirrors" (which could possibly be wrapped by a
On Friday 19 June 2009 05:09:31 Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > would be much more interested in making a tool that would make it easier
> > to manage local/partial debian mirrors (i.e. one that helped resolve the
> > dependencies), rather t
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:52:43AM -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> would be much more interested in making a tool that would make it easier to
> manage local/partial debian mirrors (i.e. one that helped resolve the
> dependencies), rather than have an apt-get wrapper. I also think that once
> su
On Thursday 18 June 2009 04:47:45 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Frank Lin PIAT writes:
> > On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 16:16 -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 09 June 2009 13:14:53 sanket agarwal wrote:
> >> > This can be stated as: if a person
> >> > wants to keep a customised set of packages
On Thursday 18 June 2009 03:17:13 Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 16:16 -0500, Joseph Rawson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 June 2009 13:14:53 sanket agarwal wrote:
> > > I had an idea in mind whereby the task of making mirrors for personal
> > > distributions can be automated.
>
>
> Depen
On Friday 19 June 2009 00:27:06 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Joseph Rawson writes:
> > BTW, the subject of this thread is "apt-get wrapper for maintaining
> > Partial Mirrors". The solution I'm proposing is "a simple tool for
> > maintaining Partial Mirrors" (which could possibly be wrapped by a
Joseph Rawson writes:
> BTW, the subject of this thread is "apt-get wrapper for maintaining Partial
> Mirrors". The solution I'm proposing is "a simple tool for maintaining
> Partial Mirrors" (which could possibly be wrapped by apt-get later).
>
> I think that just pursuing an "apt-get wrapp
On Thursday 18 June 2009 02:46:42 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Joseph Rawson writes:
> > There is another application that will help with the dependencies. It's
> > called germinate, and it will take a short list of packages and a list of
> > repositories and build a bunch of different lists of
1 - 100 of 222 matches
Mail list logo
