On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 04:57:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> More than a month ago I filed a bug report
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418956
Sorry about that, fixed now.
(The daily regeneration of the Release files wasn't working because
the dak script wasn't noticin
ok - point is taken and a workaround is to don't use proposed-updates at
all (which I have to do for the last months anyways).
It remains strange though why amd64 is so unfortunate to have this bug
of broken 'official' part of Debian repository.
On Sun, 27 May 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > IIRC
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 04:57:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> IIRC amd64 is the 2nd most popular architecture, and most of the people
> use proposed-updates,
This last is simply not true. Although it's now significantly /safer/ to
use proposed-updates than it was in the past, because now
Dear Developers,
I found a problem with our package repository for
amd64 in etch-proposed-updates.
More than a month ago I filed a bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418956
which was merged with another one later on
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=419505
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 08:37:28 -0500, Matthias Julius
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>If you have more than a few clients it might be a good idea to have
>>your own private mirror. Then, if your upstream mirror has a
>>temporary problem your private one wi
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 08:37:28 -0500, Matthias Julius
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> That's why I have a local CNAME debian.debian.zugschlus.de which I try
>> to have pointing to a working germany-based mirror most of the time.
>> Saves me from updating all clie
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 08:40:17 -0700, "Wesley J. Landaker"
>>
>>Months; I've had to switch 10's of clients to use ftp.debian.org instead
>>since I've been getting intermittant problems like this with
>>ftp.us.debian.org since ~ October last year.
>
> That's
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 08:40:17 -0700, "Wesley J. Landaker"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Saturday 06 January 2007 15:31, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
>> later - the md5sum mismatch errors started some weeks ago and do happen
> ^
>
>Months; I've had
On 1/8/07, Amaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> Months;
Confirmed.
> I've had to switch 10's of clients to use ftp.debian.org instead since
> I've been getting intermittant problems like this with
> ftp.us.debian.org since ~ October last year.
I've had to switch betwee
Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> Months;
Confirmed.
> I've had to switch 10's of clients to use ftp.debian.org instead since
> I've been getting intermittant problems like this with
> ftp.us.debian.org since ~ October last year.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>head /etc/hosts
#35.9.37.225http.us.debia
On Saturday 06 January 2007 15:31, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> later - the md5sum mismatch errors started some weeks ago and do happen
^
Months; I've had to switch 10's of clients to use ftp.debian.org instead
since I've been getting interm
Hello.
Since some time I noticed that after some executions of 'apt-get update'
I'm getting 'md5sum mismatch errors'.
I've just tracked this thing down.
My apt setup used apt-cacher, whith 3 mirrors configured: ftp.de.deban.org,
ftp.uk.debian.org and ftp.us.debian.org [probably this is default
12 matches
Mail list logo
