Logan Hall wrote:
> How do i get my .Xdefaults file to be read? I am trying to get my emacs to
> use the colors specified in my .Xdefaults. with LinuxPPC it worked but it
> seems like debian isn't even looking at the .Xdefaults file. If debian
> doesn't use this file, is there another way to ge
As far as I know, Debian uses .Xresources, not .Xdefaults.
> How do i get my .Xdefaults file to be read? I am trying to get my emacs to
> use the colors specified in my .Xdefaults. with LinuxPPC it worked but it
> seems like debian isn't even looking at the .Xdefaults file. If debian
> doesn't
How do i get my .Xdefaults file to be read? I am trying to get my emacs to
use the colors specified in my .Xdefaults. with LinuxPPC it worked but it
seems like debian isn't even looking at the .Xdefaults file. If debian
doesn't use this file, is there another way to get it to take my colors?
I've been trying to compile mol-0.9.41 on my PowerMac 7300 running
Debian Potato but it complains that libiberty.h is missing. In which
package can I find this? A search of debian.org or of Usenet yielded
no clue. Thanks,
Renaud
I was wondering, just as an offhand question, whether
the unstable branch of gnome is available anywhere as
gnome .deb packages, either for x86 or for powerpc?
If I wanted to run the CVS version of gnome instead of
the official debian one (say, for instance, I wanted to try
Nautilus), what should
No no no...
Storm Linux is an -excellent- product from all I've seen of it. They
are a very intelligent, talented group of people, and their hearts are
in the right places - most of its best parts will feed back into
debian, and you can upgrade most of it from debian mirror sites.
On Tue, Feb 29
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, [iso-8859-1] Björn Johansson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> What do you think about Storm Linux 2000? I've been reading a little about
> it, and according to them, it's more easy to install than Debian although
> it's been built on Debian. Is Storm Linux 2000 a threat to Debian or is it
>
From all accounts that I've found, I've been informed that Storm
Linux 2000 is based off an outdated version of Debian (possibly hamm)... I'm
not sure if they even bothered to upgrade the packages themselves or not...
I've gone and downloaded their ISO from their site but haven't yet burned
On Tue, Feb 29, 2000 at 08:52:28AM -0600, pohl wrote:
>
>
> > if you get a boot: prompt you can enter the command:
> >
> > hd:,/boot/vmlinux-2.2.14
>
> Thank you, I hadn't realized that I was returning to a
> yaboot prompt after the -2 error code. I wasn't watching
> closely enough, and though
> if you get a boot: prompt you can enter the command:
>
> hd:,/boot/vmlinux-2.2.14
Thank you, I hadn't realized that I was returning to a
yaboot prompt after the -2 error code. I wasn't watching
closely enough, and thought it was an OF prompt. I'll
give this a whirl.
Is there syntax for poi
I also have a working threaded gdb now, but still don't have the patches in it
merged into the debian release. it's franz sirls's RPM of 4.18-4d from
dev.linuxppc.org, aliened. His powerpc patch is quite a bit more extensive
than ours, but they are also built from slightly different upstream sou
Hi!
What do you think about Storm Linux 2000? I've been reading a little about
it, and according to them, it's more easy to install than Debian although
it's been built on Debian. Is Storm Linux 2000 a threat to Debian or is it
a good thing that Debian is the source for new Linux distributions?
h
I've just installed and tested the gdb I built from source with
Kevin's patch, and it works just as well as the one he'd built
himself. (That is to say, it still doesn't work with threaded
programs, but it does work.)
C.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > On my linux/intel box, they are identified slightly differently.
> > Could it be that being stripped causes yaboot_0.5 to fail
> > to load? It wouldn't make sense to me, but that's the only difference
> > I can see.
>
> hmm don't see why, all that d
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 10:00:54PM -0600, pohl wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> >
> > Also, does anybody happen to know what an error code of -2
> > implies in 0.4?
>
> I found in include/file.h the definition for the error
> code. Now I just have to scrutinize file.c to figure out
> why the config file is
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 08:55:11PM -0600, pohl wrote:
>
> Here's where I'm stuck: In order to run ybin, I have to get
> linux started again. Unfortunately, I think that I may have
> broken yaboot_0.4 by placing the MacOS partition towards the
> end of my disk. In Open Firmware, it complains:
> "KP" == Kevin Puetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "VR" == Vincent Renardias<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
VR> You're patch doesn't apply cleanly to gdb-4.18.19990928-1:
KP> It's quite odd that it's not working for you... has anyone
KP> else tried and had it apply or fail? I can build fine, and
[Crossposted to arch-specific mailing lists FYI. Please followup to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have checked in, and karlheg is working on additional, changes that will
change the release directory structure. This is in response to #58655, and
problems with kernel version related image naming problems.
T
I wrote:
>
> Also, does anybody happen to know what an error code of -2
> implies in 0.4?
I found in include/file.h the definition for the error
code. Now I just have to scrutinize file.c to figure out
why the config file isn't being found.
#define FILE_ERR_NOTFOUND -2
I'm looking th
I've begun the adventure of bootstrapping debian/ppc onto my
new G4. Since I do not have a zip disk handy, and I do have
a yellowdog CD, I thought the best way to go about this would
be to leverage the yellowdog's convenient mac-fdisk to make
the 800K Apple_Bootstrap partition that Ethan advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> OK, I tested this build of gdb, and it seems to be behaving...
> although it
> still doesn't support threads (the thread patch seems to be applied
> during the
> build and is named i386-threads.patch - ick). I may look at it and see
> if it
> will apply cleanly to Powe
21 matches
Mail list logo
