* URL : https://github.com/AkihiroSuda/apt-transport-oci
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Description : OCI transport plugin for apt-get (i.e., apt-get over
ghcr.io)
apt-transport-oci is an apt-get plugin to support distributing *.deb
packages over an OCI
hi. Can i know all tweaks to fstab in jfs file system ??
wt., 4 wrz 2018 o 20:40 omnismoriar1 napisał(a):
>
> Hello can i join to that list ??My name is Milczarski von - underground
> and official president of Debian i Poland
> --
> omnismoriar1
>
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
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&q
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:
> $ LANG=C apt-get -d --print-uris source snappy
> Reading package lists... Done
> Need to get 1498 kB of sourc
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 wh
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/ \([^ ]*\) (\([^,)]\+\)\(,
[^)]\+\)\?)/
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,
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-ge
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&q
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 te
ian 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
If you run Debian GNU/Sid, you always, always, read again *always* have to
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
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
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".
Unfortunately, this uninstalled most of KDE, including
"plasma-desktop", "kde-plasma-desk
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 06:32:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Bug#863361: dgit-user(7): replace apt-get
> build-deps with mk-build-deps"):
> > I think what David wanted to say is:
> >
> > `apt-get install $foo' install
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Bug#863361: dgit-user(7): replace apt-get
build-deps with mk-build-deps"):
> I think what David wanted to say is:
>
> `apt-get install $foo' install recommends
> `apt-get build-dep $foo' does not install recommends
>
> Th
On 30/05/17 18:32, Ian Jackson wrote:
> David Kalnischkies writes ("Re: Bug#863361: dgit-user(7): replace apt-get
> build-deps with mk-build-deps"):
>> I would recommend not to recommend it because apt follows the general
>> recommendation of not recommending the ins
David Kalnischkies writes ("Re: Bug#863361: dgit-user(7): replace apt-get
build-deps with mk-build-deps"):
> I would recommend not to recommend it because apt follows the general
> recommendation of not recommending the installation of recommendations
> of build-dependencies
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 03:33:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: A proposal for a tool to build local
> testing debs"):
> > Or you can just do
> >
> > $ sudo apt-get build-dep ./
[…]
> Probably we should recommend --no-insta
(CCing Nikolaus's bug.)
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: A proposal for a tool to build local
testing debs"):
> Or you can just do
>
> $ sudo apt-get build-dep ./
That's not available in jessie of course, but ISTM that this is the
right answer for stretch.
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_F
* 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
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
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
&g
modify the set of installed packages, either way.
Indeed, from apt-get(8), under "upgrade":
"under no circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or
packages not already installed retrieved and installed."
--
Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u
not a EULA", 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 way. Thence stems my
habit to run &q
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
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?
[...]
>
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 in
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 tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade
64_Packages \
> | sort -k3 -n \
> | awk '{ print $1, $2 / 1024.0 / 1024.0 / 1024.0, $3 / 1024.0 / 1024.0 }' \
> | tail -n 5 \
> | tac
using the files in /var/lib/apt/lists/ directly should be avoided because the
naming scheme can change arbitrarily and the files might b
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:56:37AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 11:03:16PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > ]] Josh Triplett
> > > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > > > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
> > > >
> > > > That works nicely,
]] Josh Triplett
> [Please CC me on replies.]
>
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Josh Triplett
> > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
> > >
> > > That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance.
> > >
> > > I couldn't find any announcement
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 11:03:16PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Josh Triplett
> > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
> > >
> > > That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance.
>
> Ah, that makes sense. I loo
[Please CC me on replies.]
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Josh Triplett
> > Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
> >
> > That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance.
> >
> > I couldn't find any announcement or documentation of this, other than
>
]] Josh Triplett
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
>
> That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance.
>
> I couldn't find any announcement or documentation of this, other than
> that on the site itself, though I did find a use of it in a re
On Jul 06, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
I do not, since it does not have local nodes in my country.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance.
I couldn't find any announcement or documentation of this, other than
that on the site itself, though I did find a use of it in a recent
announcement of dbgsym packa
]] Josh Triplett
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > I'd not actively recommend people use httpredir.debian.org as it's
> > somewhat sporadically maintained.
>
> Do you have any more details on that? Does a better alternative exist?
I personally recommend using deb.debian.org.
> I still have hopes t
Josh,
On 5 July 2016 at 14:53, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> I'd not actively recommend people use httpredir.debian.org as it's
>> somewhat sporadically maintained.
>
> Do you have any more details on that?
There was a discussion[1] on "debian-project" mailing list a few
month
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I'd not actively recommend people use httpredir.debian.org as it's
> somewhat sporadically maintained.
Do you have any more details on that? Does a better alternative exist?
I still have hopes that someday the d-i mirror question becomes an
expert-level question for peop
]] Martin Bagge / brother
> On 2016-07-05 06:32, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>
> > # apt-get update
> > Err:1 http://ftp.debian.org/debian sid InRelease
> > Could not connect to klecker-ftp.debian.org:80 (130.89.148.12),
> > connection timed out [IP: 2001:6b0:e:2018::173
bian.org
>> ftp.debian.org has address 130.239.18.173
>> ftp.debian.org has address 130.239.18.165
>> ftp.debian.org has IPv6 address 2001:6b0:e:2018::165
>> ftp.debian.org has IPv6 address 2001:6b0:e:2018::173
>> ftp.debian.org mail is handled by 0 .
>
> Was this comman
On 07/05/16 06:32, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> this morning I found "apt-get update" getting stuck due to an
> unresponsive host:
>
Sorry, this was supposed to go to debian-user.
Regards
Harri
On 2016-07-05 06:32, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> this morning I found "apt-get update" getting stuck due to an
> unresponsive host:
>
> # cat /etc/apt/sources.list
> deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian sid main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://ftp.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi folks,
this morning I found "apt-get update" getting stuck due to an
unresponsive host:
# cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian sid main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian sid main contri
Package: apt
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-...@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
We would like to start creating the keys that sign unstable in crypto
tokens, so that they are never seen by a general purpose comuting
devices.
These keys would probably be subkeys of the ftp
|
>> Cache->VS().CmpVersion(Version,Ver) < 0)) {
>> Last = Parse;
>> Offset = Parse->Offset();
>> Version = Ver;
>
>> --- a/test/integration/test-apt-get-source
>> +++ b/test/integration
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, a
ing 'framework' to setup
> > packages, repositories and webservers among others) wouldn't hurt the
> > acceptance of a patch either.
>
> How sane can a framework be if it has to generate packages that are "used
> only by testcases and surf [...]", even t
ons building a testing 'framework' to setup
> packages, repositories and webservers among others) wouldn't hurt the
> acceptance of a patch either.
How sane can a framework be if it has to generate packages that are "used
only by testcases and surf [...]", even thou
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
e don't need to look further
if (VerTag.empty() == false && (VerTag == Ver))
break;
}
To fix this problem, one can add a 'break;' at the point, where apt got
the correct version.
Then 'apt-get -t unstable source ' works as expected,
but
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 li
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
> -
Hi folks,
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
Everytime the
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
ssumes the users is
>>> not able to express himself correctly. apt-get is treating its
>>> user as its god instead, aka: user is always right, even if it
>>> makes no sense in apt's simple mind.
>>>
>> My main problem is that, whenever I install a
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
; > in /etc/apt/pref*), but at least you can tell it to try harder. :-/
> >
> > I shouldn't, I really shouldn't, but well, I bite…
> >
> > This isn't trying harder, it is trying increasingly incorrect solutions
> > to the problem because aptitude ass
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
;> > resolver. All I want is for aptitude to behave in a sane way by default.
>>
>> I think it's time to use apt-cudf. On a standard sid installation with
>> gnome, it could perfectly resolve this situation:
>>
>> % apt-get -s --solver aspcud install sysvin
n equally-complex
> > resolver. All I want is for aptitude to behave in a sane way by default.
>
> I think it's time to use apt-cudf. On a standard sid installation with
> gnome, it could perfectly resolve this situation:
>
> % apt-get -s --solver aspcud install sysvinit-core
omplex priority scheme in an equally-complex resolver.
> All I want is for aptitude to behave in a sane way by default.
I think it's time to use apt-cudf. On a standard sid installation with
gnome, it could perfectly resolve this situation:
% apt-get -s --solver aspcud install sysv
27;t, I really shouldn't, but well, I bite…
>
> This isn't trying harder, it is trying increasingly incorrect solutions
> to the problem because aptitude assumes the users is not able to express
> himself correctly. apt-get is treating its user as its god instead, aka:
> us
really shouldn't, but well, I bite…
This isn't trying harder, it is trying increasingly incorrect solutions
to the problem because aptitude assumes the users is not able to express
himself correctly. apt-get is treating its user as its god instead, aka:
user is always right, even if it
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
Hi,
is it intentional that gnome is removed when systemd is replaced by
sysvinit-core?
an
apt-get install sysvinit-core sysvinit-utils
on a fresh jessie removed most of the gnome desktop.
I dont want systemd and i'd like to remove as much of the blob as possible. I
thought
sy
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:11:50 -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:14:41AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > (If you don't like that, we can probably consider your patches to
> > dd-schroot-cmd :)
>
> Is the source code only in /usr/local/bin on the schroot machines? Or
> is
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:14:41AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>
> dd-schroot-cmd -c weaseltst -- apt-get install
> libqt5opengl5-dev/experimental
OK, thank you.
> Which appears to have worked.
>
> (If you don't like that, we can probably consider your patches to
&
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014, Adam Majer wrote:
> There seems to be an issue with dd-schroot-cmd on porter boxes (I just
> checked barriere) where it seems impossible to actually use
> experimental distribution.
>
> For example,
>
> $ dd-schroot-cmd -c $ssession -- apt-get b
Hello,
There seems to be an issue with dd-schroot-cmd on porter boxes (I just
checked barriere) where it seems impossible to actually use
experimental distribution.
For example,
$ dd-schroot-cmd -c $ssession -- apt-get build-dep qtcreator -t experimental
E: Build-Depends dependency for
Mike Gabriel schrieb am Dienstag, dem 01. April 2014:
> When using debian testing, it is not trivial to get the previous version of a
> package after it is upgraded. snapshot.debian.org is the source to go for
> these
> cases, but it has only a web interface. apt-get-snapshot na
Hi,
On 01.04.2014 12:38, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> When using debian testing, it is not trivial to get the previous version of a
> package after it is upgraded. [..]
debsnap (in devscripts) is your friend.
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F
Hi James, hi Arno,
On Di 01 Apr 2014 13:07:47 CEST, James McCoy wrote:
On Apr 1, 2014 6:39 AM, "Mike Gabriel"
wrote:
* Package name : apt-get-snapshot
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Leandro Lisboa Penz
* URL : https://github.com/lpenz/apt-get-snapshot
On Apr 1, 2014 6:39 AM, "Mike Gabriel"
wrote:
> * Package name: apt-get-snapshot
> Version : 1.1
> Upstream Author : Leandro Lisboa Penz
> * URL : https://github.com/lpenz/apt-get-snapshot
> * License : BSD
> Programming
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Gabriel
* Package name: apt-get-snapshot
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Leandro Lisboa Penz
* URL : https://github.com/lpenz/apt-get-snapshot
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Download
On 03/06/2014 07:33 AM, Solal Rastier wrote:
> Hello! I've an idea for a new apt-get package style :
>
> Developer side :
> -The developer create a ./install script in the source code.
> -The install script executes all commands necessary for install the software.
> Also,
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 06:58:41PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 03/06/2014 05:01 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > Script to do this attached; can I have my GSoC money now? :)
>
> Homer: Can I have some money now?
BTW; just for context, I thought this message was to a soc-coordinati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 03/06/2014 05:01 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> Script to do this attached; can I have my GSoC money now? :)
Comic Book Guy: I'm interested in upgrading my 28.8k modem to a
fibre-optic T1 line. Will you be able to provide
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 04:33:50PM +0100, Solal Rastier wrote:
> Hello! I've an idea for a new apt-get package style :
>
> Developer side :
> -The developer create a ./install script in the source code.
> -The install script executes all commands necessary for install the s
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Solal Rastier wrote:
> Hello! I've an idea for a new apt-get package style :
>
> Developer side :
> -The developer create a ./install script in the source code.
> -The install script executes all commands necessary for install the software.
There is a tool named as apt-build. It should be satisfied for your need.
Sent From My Heart
My Page: http://www.liangsuilong.info
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Solal Rastier wrote:
> Hello! I've an idea for a new apt-get package style :
>
> Developer side :
> -The d
Hello! I've an idea for a new apt-get package style :
Developer side :
-The developer create a ./install script in the source code.
-The install script executes all commands necessary for install the software.
Also, it getting dependancies, etc.
-The developer create a tarball (.tar.bzip2
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://
1 - 100 of 542 matches
Mail list logo
