Package: apt-file
Severity: minor
On Vi, 24 oct 14, 13:44:06, Malte Forkel wrote:
> Am 24.10.2014 um 13:08 schrieb Darac Marjal:
> > Actually, apt-file will search the whole path (try 'apt-file search
> > bin'). If you like, try the -x option to apt-file to specify a
> > perl-compatible regex.
>
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:25:37 -0700
RParr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George Borisov wrote:RParr wrote:
> Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
> packages to install for the following two situations:
>
> 1) install/update kernel 2.6.16,
RParr wrote:
> George Borisov wrote:
>>
>> What processor have you got?
>>
>
> Dual Opteron; that's why I originally installed the linux*-amd64-k8
> versions.
Hmm, I can't even see the 64 bit kernels in my apt-cache. This would
make sense, as I'm not running 64bit.
Over to someone else on t
George Borisov wrote:
RParr wrote:
Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
packages to install for the following two situations:
1) install/update kernel 2.6.16, headers, etc.
2) install/update kernel 2.6.17, headers, etc.
What processor
Greg Madden wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 08:30:17 -0700
RParr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
packages to install for the following two situations:
1) install/update kernel 2.6.16, headers, etc.
2) install/update kernel
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 08:30:17 -0700
RParr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
> packages to install for the following two situations:
>
> 1) install/update kernel 2.6.16, headers, etc.
>
> 2) install/update ker
RParr wrote:
> Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
> packages to install for the following two situations:
>
> 1) install/update kernel 2.6.16, headers, etc.
>
> 2) install/update kernel 2.6.17, headers, etc.
What processor have you got?
Could someone please clarify which is the correct set of Debian sid
packages to install for the following two situations:
1) install/update kernel 2.6.16, headers, etc.
2) install/update kernel 2.6.17, headers, etc.
both including the ability to install/build modules for nvidia, ivtv,
vmware
Craig wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote:
>
> > > The autoup.sh is ment to be used in bo->hamm upgrade, AFAIK.
> > > Normal updates are easy, just point dselect/apt to a mirror, get
> > > updates and let it install. Just fire up and tap enter a few times.
> >
> > It is
Hello,
I just tried to look at this site (http://debian.vicnet.net.au), but in
vain. Anybody knows other places with autoup.sh?
Does it works good with 1.3.0?
>
> my preferred method for upgrading to hamm is:
>
> 1. download autoup.sh and the tarball from
> http://debian.vicne
On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote:
> > The autoup.sh is ment to be used in bo->hamm upgrade, AFAIK.
> > Normal updates are easy, just point dselect/apt to a mirror, get
> > updates and let it install. Just fire up and tap enter a few times.
>
> It is usually a good idea to upgrade
j:
>
> The autoup.sh is ment to be used in bo->hamm upgrade, AFAIK.
> Normal updates are easy, just point dselect/apt to a mirror, get
> updates and let it install. Just fire up and tap enter a few times.
It is usually a good idea to upgrade dpkg first with dpkg, in case there
have been enhanc
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:15:07AM -0700, Nick Moffitt wrote:
>> > On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>> >
>> > > Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
>> > > superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly through
>> > > every version,
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can you give me or point me to 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3, or 1.1 to 1.3,
> upgrade instructions? Thanks.
imo, you'd be better off waiting for hamm (2.0) to be released - or
order a pre-release hamm CD (there are several people who sell them...i
think netgod
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 23:30:26 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>Yes, but it is not the time to install hamm yet for an end user. I don't
>think it is appropriate for Debian to switch over to Microsoft release
>schedule (another extreme statement I'm happy to weak).
Rats, I'm not an end user? *S
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
> > superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly
> > through every version, even major version changes.
>
> "The success varied" and "that mostly all users can upgra
On 17 Jun 98 05:10:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Oh yeah? On my hamm->bo DOWNGRADE, I had to UPLOAD more than that.
Goddamn! You win. :-)
Rob Wilderspin
--
"But I need it to crash once every few days -
reboots are the only chance I get to sleep..."
--= (send replies t
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 12:08:49PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can you give me or point me to 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3, or 1.1 to 1.3, upgrade
> instructions? Thanks.
I don't think there were a lot of instructions for those upgrades
at the time, unlike the 1.3 -> 2.0 upgrade.
There is a file READM
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:47:20AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:39:36 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> No, I draw an alternate conclusion based on facts and experiences
> seperate from your own. We both could go blue in the face (or get advanced
> carpal tunnel) defendi
Can you give me or point me to 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3, or 1.1 to 1.3, upgrade
instructions? Thanks.
Chuck Kaufman
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 02:33:04AM +, Robert Wilderspin wrote:
> On 16 Jun 98 17:39:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >There is the package "cruft" in slink, which will compare dpkg's databases
> >with the installed files and print the differences (taking a lot of further
> >input into acco
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998, Robert Wilderspin wrote:
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 03:27:50 GMT
> From: Robert Wilderspin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Please clarify...
> Resent-Date: 17 Jun 1998 04:20:23 -
> Resent-From: debian-user@list
On 17 Jun 98 03:19:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:25:08PM +0200, Jens Ritter wrote:
> > Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Should I really wait for the stable release? Seeing as I am not
> > > desperate to upgrade?
> >
> > In case it is expensive for y
On 16 Jun 98 17:39:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There is the package "cruft" in slink, which will compare dpkg's databases
>with the installed files and print the differences (taking a lot of further
>input into account).
It sounds like cruft does much the same as the "verify" script found
i
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:25:08PM +0200, Jens Ritter wrote:
> > Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Should I really wait for the stable release? Seeing as I am not
> > > desperate to upgrade?
> >
> > In case it is expensive for you to get internet access, it
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 05:38:51PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:36:24 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> >But that is a design goal of the distribution. If it is not being met,
> >it is a bug -- please report bugs as appropriate.
>
> It is an unobtainable goal.
I couldn't
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:25:08PM +0200, Jens Ritter wrote:
> Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Should I really wait for the stable release? Seeing as I am not
> > desperate to upgrade?
>
> In case it is expensive for you to get internet access, it is wise to
> wait for official cdro
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:47:20AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> No, I draw an alternate conclusion based on facts and experiences
> seperate from your own. We both could go blue in the face (or get advanced
> carpal tunnel) defending our stances. I do not think either is wrong. I
> just don't
Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Should I really wait for the stable release? Seeing as I am not
> desperate to upgrade?
In case it is expensive for you to get internet access, it is wise to
wait for official cdroms.
1.3.1 -> hamm takes ~50 MB of downloads.
Jens
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:39:36 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>> I love that term, FUD. It implies an untruth. It is true that people
>> have complained about a bo->hamm upgade on this list.
>But you draw the wrong conclusions. I already told you that hamm is not
>released. If there are many
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:20:02AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:07:27 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> >there are two cases where an upgrade can fail:
>
> A monty Python fan there, eh?
I study mathematics --- I can neither count nor calculate :)
> >1) You waited to l
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:07:27 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>there are two cases where an upgrade can fail:
A monty Python fan there, eh?
>1) You waited to long. It may be hard to upgrade a rexx system (although
>2) You changed the system in places unknown to dpkg. I'm not sure how much
>3)
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 10:15:07AM -0700, Nick Moffitt wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> > Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
> > superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly through
> > every version, even major versio
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
> superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly through
> every version, even major version changes.
I was told that there was a way to auto-upgrade. Th
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 09:52:12AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:50:15 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> >Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
> >superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly through
> >every version, even ma
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:50:15 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>Yes, but *there is no need for a re-install*! Debian has a great and
>superior upgrading mechanism, and your system will update cleanly through
>every version, even major version changes.
Rght, that is why we see people in here
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 07:48:26AM -0700, Neil Cheshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could someone please clarify for me about all the Debian releases. I
> currently run Debian 1.3 which is bo , right?
Yes.
> I haven't really done much
> to my system so was going to reinstall w
On 16 Jun, David Z. Maze wrote:
>
> Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> NC> Could someone please clarify for me about all the Debian
> NC> releases. I currently run Debian 1.3 which is bo , right? I
> NC> haven't really done much to my system so was g
Neil Cheshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
NC> Could someone please clarify for me about all the Debian
NC> releases. I currently run Debian 1.3 which is bo , right? I
NC> haven't really done much to my system so was going to reinstall
NC> with Debian 2.0 which is hamm ,
Hi,
Could someone please clarify for me about all the Debian releases. I
currently run Debian 1.3 which is bo , right? I haven't really done much
to my system so was going to reinstall with Debian 2.0 which is hamm ,
ok so far? So what is slink? Is this what is coming out in June,
40 matches
Mail list logo
