Hi David, hi All :)
thank You very much for this informative mail, David. It is very kind of
You to think about all AMD Debian users. Much appreciated !
I don't have to add much. The issue at Freedesktop.org is:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2171
There is a fix but everybod
Hi list readers
A FYI: I am far from expert in these things but I noticed that a kernel
with a known bug affecting AMD graphics is about to enter the unstable
distribution [1], and possibly the testing distribution as well.
[1]:"""
I would like to upload linux version 6.1.6-1 to unstable.
[...]
N
John Hasler wrote:
> Sven writes:
>> It is of note that "experimental" in itself is not a complete set of
>> packages like "unstable" is, it is intended as an addon to "unstable"
>> and has to be used in conjunction with it.
> It is also of note that Unstable is unstable in that it is constantly
Sven writes:
> It is of note that "experimental" in itself is not a complete set of
> packages like "unstable" is, it is intended as an addon to "unstable"
> and has to be used in conjunction with it.
It is also of note that Unstable is unstable in that it is constantly
changing, not that it is fu
Kushal Kumaran wrote:
> There is an experimental "distribution" that is for trying all kinds of
> new and weird things.
It is of note that "experimental" in itself is not a complete set of
packages like "unstable" is, it is intended as an addon to "unstable"
and has to be used in conjunction wit
rhkra...@gmail.com writes:
> Aside: for my own self respect, I want to make some sort of disclaimer here
> (with maybe several points): I'm sure that sometimes I post things that do
> any of (1) make other people cringe (for one reason or another), (2) make me
> look uninformed (or worse), and
Hi there,
youre are far from an idiot. All this stuff like stable etc/ etc. rests on conventions. You wrote you never insxtalled something other than
stable. So: do not worry why should you worry about this shit. In a philosophical way your point of view if you have any developed now on
this t
o Unstable (concentrating on things that survived some initial
> testing and now maybe being released to a select group for some real
> pounding en route to Stable.
Trivia: Long ago Debian only had stable and unstable, testing was
introduced later.
Basically packages that are meant for the ne
Aside: for my own self respect, I want to make some sort of disclaimer here
(with maybe several points): I'm sure that sometimes I post things that do
any of (1) make other people cringe (for one reason or another), (2) make me
look uninformed (or worse), and (3) other causes for embarrassment
On Ma, 21 dec 10, 10:24:47, Alexander Batischev wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 07:27:37AM +, r...@upp.pt wrote:
> > I'm searhcing for the safe way to upgrade my current debian to
> > testing/unstable in order to install the newset verion of OpenAFS
> > (1.4.12.1). I don't want to fully upgrad
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 11:24:04AM +0200, Alexander Batischev wrote:
> That's exactly what I need. Thank you!
Good. But please keep the thread in the list, don't mail me privately without a
need. ;)
--
Regards,
Alexander Batischev
1024D/69093C81
F870 A381 B5F5 D2A1 1B35 4D63 A1A7 1C77 6909 3C8
- Forwarded message from r...@upp.pt -
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:33:53 +
From: r...@upp.pt
To: Alexander Batischev
Subject: Re: Safe and easy ipgrade to unstable/testing.
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 10:24:47 +0200, Alexander Batischev
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 07:27:37AM +
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 07:27:37AM +, r...@upp.pt wrote:
> I'm searhcing for the safe way to upgrade my current debian to
> testing/unstable in order to install the newset verion of OpenAFS
> (1.4.12.1). I don't want to fully upgrade my system -- only the the
> necessary dependencies should be
I'm searhcing for the safe way to upgrade my current debian to
testing/unstable in order to install the newset verion of OpenAFS
(1.4.12.1). I don't want to fully upgrade my system -- only the the
necessary dependencies should be used from testing/unstable repositories.
Hw can I do that?
-- Rizo
--- On Wed, 6/9/10, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
>From what I have seen so far, I would recommend ubuntu 9.10 for your netbook,
>followed by debian testing or unstable.
++=
Thanks so much for your input. I've got madwifi working Debian on my Acer
Aspire One.
2010-06-09 01:55, ABSDoug skrev:
This was the 1st time I had heard of "stab le"& "unstable", I only
knew there was "testing", which I wanted to avoid. Sounded very
reasonable, with a name like "stable"& finding out Debian is the
SOURCE for other distros, I'm thinking stable is what you'd use if
On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 04:55:03PM -0700, ABSDoug wrote:
> Thanks a BUNCH for all the responds! If I'm repeating myself, forgive,
> I'm not sure what you've read so far (had some posting issues, now
> resolved). I'd like to explain my desire to use Debian stable so as to
> get some education here,
<<< I originally wrote:
I do know I want to stick with "stable" Debian >>>
<<< Someone else wrote:
I my opinion there is no need to do so. Squeeze is close to freeze, soon it
will became stable. You better run it. Personally I run it on my EeePC and have
(almost) no problems. Advantage of runnin
Hello
Joey Hess (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> Bryan Frechette wrote:
>> Hi i'm running debian testing and when i do apt-get update, i get a
>> public key fail when i update my database to do an upgrade of my
>> debian server and i the public key fails what do i do then
>
> apt-get --allow-unauth
Hello
Bryan Frechette (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> Hi i'm running debian testing and when i do apt-get update, i get a
> public key fail when i update my database to do an upgrade of my
> debian server and i the public key fails what do i do then
You need to import the archive key for 2006 (ma
Bryan Frechette wrote:
> Hi i'm running debian testing and when i do apt-get update, i get a public
> key fail when i update my database to do an upgrade of my debian server
> and i the public key fails what do i do then
apt-get --allow-unauthenticated install debian-archive-keyring
--
see shy j
Hi i'm running debian testing and when i do apt-get update, i get a public
key fail when i update my database to do an upgrade of my debian server
and i the public key fails what do i do then
Thanks very much
Bryan Frechette
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "uns
cription how you keep your system up to date (e.g.
"unstable/testing all the time", "first bunk-1, after that bunk-2"
etc.).
People, who don't have that file on their system (or only
/usr/share/texmf/metapost/context/base/metafun.mp, note that "base"
in the path),
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 06:22:18AM +0200, Matthijs wrote:
> ...
> I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recognize you're problem
> with the package management. I'm used to a windows environment. You
> want a new application? Go to the website, download the setup.exe and
> execute - you're don
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 06:22:18AM +0200, Matthijs wrote:
> I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recognize you're problem
> with the package management. I'm used to a windows environment. You
> want a new application? Go to the website, download the setup.exe and
> execute - you're done.
Us
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:50:12 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> You rule! Finally! Man, I'm not sure what to think of Debian yet. I'm
> having a hard time picking up the package management system for some reason.
You're welcome!
I think I'm as much a newbie as you are and recogni
You rule! Finally! Man, I'm not sure what to think of Debian yet. I'm
having a hard time picking up the package management system for some reason.
Also, testing distro doesn't seem to have the libc-client2002edebian
package, but an install of the unstable package worked fine.
While, I am at
Yep, the same thing is happening with POP3 as well. Thanks a bunch, I
will give this a try.
Matthijs wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:10:09 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So, I have having problems getting unstable and testing versions of
uw-impad Debian packages working. The vers
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:10:09 +0200, Matt Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> So, I have having problems getting unstable and testing versions of
> uw-impad Debian packages working. The version numbers are
> 7:2002edebian1-3 and 7:2002ddebian1-4 respectivly. With these two
> packages installed
So I have been struggling/messing with uw-imapd and uw-imapd-ssl for a
couple of weeks and am having some problems. I have also at the same
time been learning Debian (RedHat man most of my life), so I am learning
all about dselect, apt-get, and dpkg.
So, I have having problems getting unstable
On 2004-01-12, Goran Christiansson penned:
> Dear All,
>
> I am a newbie to Debian, and I ran into problems today. I did just
> like it says here below, but when I reboot I do not come further than
> "LI" of "LILO".
>
> After googleing a bit I found that this was a "well known" problem,
> and that
Goran Christiansson wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I am a newbie to Debian, and I ran into problems today. I did just like it
> says here below, but when I reboot I do not come further than "LI" of
> "LILO".
>
> After googleing a bit I found that this was a "well known" problem, and
> that> it can be solve
Goran Christiansson wrote:
Dear All,
I am a newbie to Debian, and I ran into problems today. I did just like it
says here below, but when I reboot I do not come further than "LI" of
"LILO".
After googleing a bit I found that this was a "well known" problem, and that
it can be solved using a boot d
Dear All,
I am a newbie to Debian, and I ran into problems today. I did just like it
says here below, but when I reboot I do not come further than "LI" of
"LILO".
After googleing a bit I found that this was a "well known" problem, and that
it can be solved using a boot disk.
Could someone explai
--- Alphonse Ogulla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Someone on this list (I think David Z Maze)
> commented that If I was brave
> enough to run a Linux kernel so young (2.6.0) then
> I'm probably brave enough
> to run unstable too.
>
> Well, I've given it a thought and decided to migrate
> two of
Someone on this list (I think David Z Maze) commented that If I was brave
enough to run a Linux kernel so young (2.6.0) then I'm probably brave enough
to run unstable too.
Well, I've given it a thought and decided to migrate two of my three debian
"woody" installations to unstable and testing r
I've been having problems with X instability for a long time. I'll do
something in a app (usually mozilla, firebird or galeon) and X will
freeze, not responding to keyboard commands or mouse movement.
I can still ssh into the machine, run top and find out that X is
consuming 99% of my CPU cycles.
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 08:09:43AM +0100, James Stone wrote:
> Just a quick question: why is the default gcc 3.3 in unstable/testing
> when the only one that seems to work for compiling stuff (at least on
> my system) is gcc 3.2.3?
Works fine for me, although we're having to fix u
Just a quick question: why is the default gcc 3.3 in unstable/testing when
the only one that seems to work for compiling stuff (at least on my system)
is gcc 3.2.3?
James
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 14 December 2001 05:02 am, Thomas Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after upgrading an unstable release this week and building a 2.4.16 kernel
> the following error occured:
>
> error: undefined reference to `local symbols in discarded section
> .data.exit
>
> later I messed up the machine, so her
Hi,
after upgrading an unstable release this week and building a 2.4.16 kernel
the following error occured:
error: undefined reference to `local symbols in discarded section .data.exit
later I messed up the machine, so here are the things I've written down
or can remember:
net.o and char.o whe
rities in /etc/apt/preferences to just
upgrade a few pacakges while still tracking testing for the rest of your
system. see posts in the archives from der.hans for help on that.
> Has anyone had experience with what kinds of issues I might run into
> moving from unstable->testing? From w
A while ago I had to set myself up a little low-priority router. Now,
being the irresponsible person I am, I just had to install unstable to
get a few toys testing was missing at the time. :)
Has anyone had experience with what kinds of issues I might run into
moving from unstable->testing? F
on Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 08:28:55AM -0500, Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 11:23:50AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 07:16:24PM +0200, Viktor Rosenfeld
> > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > I've found unstable to be of better use than test
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 01:38:07PM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> So you're saying that things that go into the security updates site
> don't also appear in unstable? And this isn't just because the security
> fixes are against stable packages that are already superseded in
> unstable?
As I underst
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 11:23:50AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 07:16:24PM +0200, Viktor Rosenfeld
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I've found unstable to be of better use than testing. The reason is
> > that even bugfixes need at least 10 days to go into testing, wherea
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 06:16:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
| on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 01:38:07PM -0700, Craig Dickson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
| > Karsten M. Self wrote:
| >
| > > > I've found unstable to be of better use than testing. The reason is
| > > > that even bugfixes need at leas
on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 01:38:07PM -0700, Craig Dickson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Karsten M. Self wrote:
>
> > > I've found unstable to be of better use than testing. The reason is
> > > that even bugfixes need at least 10 days to go into testing, whereas in
> > > unstable they could be inclu
Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > I've found unstable to be of better use than testing. The reason is
> > that even bugfixes need at least 10 days to go into testing, whereas in
> > unstable they could be included the next day.
>
> ...but not security updates, IIRC. These should be available
> immed
on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 07:16:24PM +0200, Viktor Rosenfeld ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Ross Burton wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2001-08-30 at 17:09, Robert L. Harris wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > hmm, Ok, give me a list of stability:
> > >
> > > potato most stable
> > > sid (unstable) next most stable
> >
Hello list,
I want to go back from unstable to testing in the hope for fewer broken
dependencies and so on, now: in order to install a certain gnome package
(libgnome-dev, which I need to compile Pan (I want to compile recent
versions, I am following their user-list)) I stumbled upon some
de
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:33:15AM +1000, Charles Thornhill-Cole wrote:
> There are a couple of packages from unstable and testing that I would
> like to use on a production server running stable. Should I just
> compile them and play it safe?
apt-get -b source has been my friend for a while now.
On 30-Mar-2001 Charles Thornhill-Cole wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If one were to install the libc6 package from unstable on top of a stable
> install, would it break things? how badly?
>
> There are a couple of packages from unstable and testing that I would like to
> use on a production server running sta
Hi,
If one were to install the libc6 package from
unstable on top of a stable install, would it break things?
how badly?
There are a couple of packages from unstable and
testing that I would like to use on a production server running stable. Should I
just compile them and play it safe?
54 matches
Mail list logo
