Hi Michael. You got that right, exactly. I had followed some instructions from
a blog post to install Oracle database on the system, but it was long,
incomplete instructions, requiring a fair amount of mucking around in the
system for me to try to get it right. I didn't quite get it running yet.
That solved it!
I tried the 'getent' command and it found nothing, so I resolved to just
find anything mentioning dba_group_gid... turned out that some lines I
added to /etc/sysctl.conf while trying to install Oracle (working from a
fairly informative blog posting about installing Oracle on Debian
Am 07.10.2014 um 19:53 schrieb Don Armstrong:
> On Tue, 07 Oct 2014, Sentientmeat Net wrote:
>> Hmm, I tried to figure out what group id might be required to replace...
>>
>> 'vm.hugetlb_shm_grop dba_group_gid'
>>
>> ...with, in...
>>
>> /etc/sysctl.conf and /etc/sysctl.d/* (and I have no idea wher
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014, Sentientmeat Net wrote:
> Hmm, I tried to figure out what group id might be required to replace...
>
> 'vm.hugetlb_shm_grop dba_group_gid'
>
> ...with, in...
>
> /etc/sysctl.conf and /etc/sysctl.d/* (and I have no idea where or which
> package 'dba_group_gid' came from--some
Hi Don,
Hmm, I tried to figure out what group id might be required to replace...
'vm.hugetlb_shm_grop dba_group_gid'
...with, in...
/etc/sysctl.conf and /etc/sysctl.d/* (and I have no idea where or which
package 'dba_group_gid' came from--something standard and maintained I'm
99.9% sure). I ran
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014, Sentientmeat Net wrote:
> # journalctl -b _PID=7477
> -- Logs begin at Sun 2014-10-05 10:05:14 PDT, end at Mon 2014-10-06
> 20:11:54 PDT. --
> Oct 06 19:46:43 sinova systemd-sysctl[7477]: Failed to write
> 'dba_group_gid' to '/proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group': Invalid argument
/
Hi,
I've Googled around for where to start to solve this problem, and I can't
even begin.
I confess, I don't grok systemd or systemctl at all. Suddenly my breezy
aptitude updates have broken, and I can't make even the smallest change
with apt-get or aptitude. I've t
On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 06:38:36AM -0700, Michael M. Moore wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 19:02 -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
> >
> > > So exercising an abundance of caution I usually stick with synaptic.
> > > Maybe on my
Michael M. Moore wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 19:02 -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
So exercising an abundance of caution I usually stick with synaptic.
Maybe on my next install I'll look into Aptitude.
What do
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 19:02 -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
>
> > So exercising an abundance of caution I usually stick with synaptic.
> > Maybe on my next install I'll look into Aptitude.
>
> What do you do when X dies or need
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 07:02:47PM -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
>
> > So exercising an abundance of caution I usually stick with synaptic.
> > Maybe on my next install I'll look into Aptitude.
>
> What do you do when X dies o
Ken Irving wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 07:25:58AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 11:09:07AM -0800, Ken Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
>> heard to say:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
No, I just come down hard on this meme b
On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 07:25:58AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 11:09:07AM -0800, Ken Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
> heard to say:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > No, I just come down hard on this meme because it seems to
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 11:09:07AM -0800, Ken Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > No, I just come down hard on this meme because it seems to have taken
> > on a life of its own and I'd like to squash it before it
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
> So exercising an abundance of caution I usually stick with synaptic.
> Maybe on my next install I'll look into Aptitude.
What do you do when X dies or needs changing?
Doug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 11:09:07AM -0800, Ken Irving wrote:
> That sounds good, but is it different now than it used to be? I haven't
> tried it lately, but it used to "seem" to want to remove lots of things.
> I'm aware of the workarounds (keep-all or whatever), have followed most
> of the thre
i'll through in my 2cts worth on this. i personally
find that aptitude is a stronger program, especially
for newer users, after using both, aptitude seems to
keep the system cleaner with less loose ends and is
less likely to break dependencies. at least that is my
experience
jwlockhart
jwlockhart
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 11:09:07 -0800
Ken Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> apt-get user waiting for a reason to change. Two problems I have with
> aptitude are the lack of "source" functionality and my inability to spell
> it as easily as apt-get. ;-)
At least here, it's actually easier;
On Nov 1, 2007, at 2:41 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[This message has also been posted to linux.debian.user.]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Duehr wrote:
I think the niftiest feature (and one that still has me scratching my
head as to how you accomplished it) is the MOUSE control in cur
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:33:00PM -, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
> On Oct 27, 2:50 pm, Chris Lale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If you use both aptitude and apt-get, read the NewbieDOC article about the
> > magic
> > bullet[1] "aptitude keep-all".
> >
> > [1]http://newbiedoc.berlios.de/wiki/
[This message has also been posted to linux.debian.user.]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Duehr wrote:
>
> On Oct 29, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> I
>> occasionally notice people writing that they just discovered
>> aptitude's
>> curses interface after using it for ages, so I k
On Oct 27, 2:50 pm, Chris Lale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you use both aptitude and apt-get, read the NewbieDOC article about the
> magic
> bullet[1] "aptitude keep-all".
>
> [1]http://newbiedoc.berlios.de/wiki/Aptitude_-_using_together_with_Synap...
>
That's a newbie doc? :) Clear as mud.
On Oct 27, 2:50 pm, Chris Lale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you use both aptitude and apt-get, read the NewbieDOC article about the
> magic
> bullet[1] "aptitude keep-all".
>
> [1]http://newbiedoc.berlios.de/wiki/Aptitude_-_using_together_with_Synap...
>
That's a newbie doc? :) Clear as mud.
[replying to my own post]
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:26:55 -0400
Celejar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:53:46 +0100
> Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > in synaptic to browse than it is in aptitude. And I wish you could
> > reverse direction in mid-searc
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:53:46 +0100
Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> in synaptic to browse than it is in aptitude. And I wish you could
> reverse direction in mid-search in aptitude. I often race past a
> relevant match by being too quick on the "n". If only "b" for back or
> "
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 07:01:53AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:35:02PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackv
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 07:01:53AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:35:02PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackv
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:35:02PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> > >
> > > this b
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:36:07PM +0100, Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:31:12PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:53:46AM +0100, Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > was heard to say:
> [...]
> > > reverse direction
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:31:12PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:53:46AM +0100, Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 05:22:16PM -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > aptitude is by far one of the best package manageme
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:31:12PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:53:46AM +0100, Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
[...]
> > reverse direction in mid-search in aptitude. I often race past a
> > relevant match by being too quick on the "n". If only
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:53:46AM +0100, Richard Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 05:22:16PM -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
>
> [...]
> > aptitude is by far one of the best package management tools out
> > there. Newbies and folks really stuck in the graphic-ori
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> >
> > this bothers me, since I mostly use aptitude. When I need a build-dep
> > or source, I'm concerned that later aptitude
Thanks for the kind words. :)
At the risk of spoling the mystery,
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 05:22:16PM -0600, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> I think the niftiest feature (and one that still has me scratching my head
> as to how you accomplished it) is the MOUSE control in
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:42PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:13:23 -0500
> > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Dan
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 05:22:16PM -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
[...]
> aptitude is by far one of the best package management tools out
> there. Newbies and folks really stuck in the graphic-oriented/desktop
> user world may like synaptic better, but for just getting things done
> -- aptitude w
On Oct 29, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
Also, I was trying to gently point out that there's more to aptitude
than the command-line. Excluding generic shared code, the rest of
aptitude is about 6 times larger than the command-line interface,
and it
would be nice to think people o
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 03:09:31PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:25:02 -0700
> Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> >
> > this bothers me, since I mostly use aptitude. When I need a build-dep
> > or source, I'm concerned that later aptitude may wipe something
>
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:25:02 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:42PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:13:23 -0500
> > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAI
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:50:37AM +0100, Dal wrote:
> Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 12:14:18AM -0600, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> was heard to say:
>>
>>> On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>>>
I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:42PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:13:23 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > said:
> >
> > > I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 12:14:18AM -0600, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that can be
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 12:14:18AM -0600, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
>
> On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
>> whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that can be driven from the
>> comma
Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> Identical behavior to apt-get has never been a goal for me, so the
> answer is almost certainly "yes". (not that I gratuitously break
> apt-get compatibility; it's just not something I track one way or the
> other unless I get bug reports)
>
one thing i noticed from
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:14:18 -0600
Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
[snip]
> > I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
> > whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that can be driven from the
> > command-li
On Oct 29, 2007, at 6:00 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:14:18 -0600
Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
[snip]
I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:13:23 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
> > whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that can be driven
On Oct 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 10:12:31AM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> was heard to say:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:02 -0700
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came acro
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 12:13:23AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
> > whereas aptitude is an interactive tool
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:06:59 -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I'd say the main difference is that apt-get is a command-line tool,
> whereas aptitude is an interactive tool that can be driven from the
> command-line.
Are there still command line usages of apt-get that a
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 10:12:31AM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:02 -0700
> Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
> > thread about apt-get and aptitude. I
On Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 12:04:34 -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
> The main difference is that aptitude in default configuration mode will track
> dependencies added for packages requested and if no package needs the
> dependency anymore, it can remove it.
> apt-get isn't that smart.
This is no long
On Oct 27, 10:10 am, Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
> thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this week
> after moving over from Gentoo. I have only been using the apt-get
> method because that is
Nate Duehr wrote:
>
> On Oct 27, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>
>> I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
>> thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this week
>> after moving over from Gentoo. I have only been using the apt-get
>> meth
On Oct 27, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this
week after moving over from Gentoo. I have only been using the apt-
get method because that is all I ever
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 10:12:31AM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:02 -0700
> Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
> > thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this week
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:01:02 -0700
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
> thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this week
> after moving over from Gentoo. I have only been using the apt-get
> metho
I was just reading the forums at forums.debian.org and came across a
thread about apt-get and aptitude. I just installed Debian this week
after moving over from Gentoo. I have only been using the apt-get
method because that is all I ever saw mentioned. But, I guess aptitude
is the preferred
SOLVED.
You have to use _ command in aptitude which
"purges" configuration data or you won't get the link
installed.
My machine used to not see a mouse or even
boot to X windows.
My machine now boots to X but not to KDE.
J wrote:
> Actually should be apt-get or aptitude questi
Actually should be apt-get or aptitude question
So it reboots with old since the link
/initrd.img
/vmlinuz
both point at the old kernel 2.6.8-3-386.
I've tried
aptitude with the L command over the
newer desired kernel which should reinstall but it didn't
fix /initrd.img adn /vmlinu
60 matches
Mail list logo
