On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:51:22PM +0930, Vesselin Kostadinov wrote:
> Well, "devfsd 1.3.25-1" is a stable package. As such it should behave
> as a stable package, regardless of the "experimental" nature of
> the packaged software. The fact is that devfsd DOES NOT WORK
> without properly recompile
> > apt-get devfs
Oops, my mistake. Please read
apt-get devfs
as
apt-get devfsd
also all referentces to package devfs should read devfsd. I guess
this made my original post a bit unclear. Sorry.
...
> > I was thinking that in an ideal world the configuration of
> > a package would fail i
Vesselin Kostadinov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I had to mess around with few packages, one of them being devfs. It
> looked easy:
>
> apt-get devfs
>
> So apt downloaded and configured it. I thought I was done with it
> and I can concentrate on the other (more important to me)
> packages. Not s
On Monday July 07, 2003 at 03:30
Vesselin Kostadinov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> apt-get devfs
>
> So apt downloaded and configured it. I thought I was done with
> it and I can concentrate on the other (more important to me) packages.
> Not so. After "become-an-expert-in-devfs" exercise
> I fi
Hi,
I had to mess around with few packages, one of them being devfs.
It looked easy:
apt-get devfs
So apt downloaded and configured it. I thought I was done with
it and I can concentrate on the other (more important to me) packages. Not
so. After "become-an-expert-in-devfs" exercise
I figure
5 matches
Mail list logo
