On Lu, 16 iul 12, 20:32:07, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
> very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
> upgrade a couple of packages. These packages are not held back (aptitude
> calls them "ke
Panayiotis Karabassis:
>
> I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
> very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
> upgrade a couple of packages.
Just run 'apt-get dist-upgrade' in these cases. It offers better
solutions in many cases. You can
Hi,
I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
upgrade a couple of packages. These packages are not held back (aptitude
calls them "kept back"), even though they may be manually installed. Is
there a way
On 28.06.2012 15:13, Joby Mathew wrote:
> root@test:~# aptitude upgrade
> The following packages will be upgraded:
> acpid at base-files bind9-host dnsutils host libapache2-mod-php5 libapr1
> libbind9-60 libbrlapi0.5 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
> liblwr
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 05:43:48PM +0530, Joby Mathew wrote:
>root@test:~# aptitude upgrade�
>The following packages will be upgraded:�
[cut]
>53 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>Need to get 0 B/43.5 MB of archives. After unpacking
root@test:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
acpid at base-files bind9-host dnsutils host libapache2-mod-php5 libapr1
libbind9-60 libbrlapi0.5 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
liblwres60 libmozjs2d libmysqlclient16 libpolkit-agent-1-0
libpolkit-backend-1-0
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:54:36PM -0400, Chris Brennan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Freeman wrote:
>
> Maybe
> >
> > apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
> >
>
> All this does is list the 4 MPM types repeatedly ...
>
> [snip]
> root@Blackdragon:~# apt-cache rdepends --installed
On 2011-03-30 15:36:49 Chris Brennan wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
> wrote:
>> It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your system.
>> Try 'aptitude why apache2.2-bin', maybe it will shed some light on why
>> it is installed.
>
>Ya I just did that and i
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Freeman wrote:
Maybe
>
> apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
>
All this does is list the 4 MPM types repeatedly ...
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
...
apache2-mpm-itk
apache2-mpm-event
apache2-mpm-prefork
ap
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Matt Harrison
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Chris Brennan wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu <
> andreimpope...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
> >> >
> >> > So why the hell is apa
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:17:52PM -0400, Chris Brennan wrote:
> My laptop was off for about a week and when I fired it up today, I ran an
> update and then an upgrade on my squeeze install and today I noticed this
>
> [snip]
> root@Blackdragon:~# aptitude upgrade
> The followin
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Chris Brennan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
>> >
>> > So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install
>> > w/
>> > no "server" services?
>>
>> It's b
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
wrote:
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
> >
> > So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install
> w/
> > no "server" services?
>
> It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your system.
> Try
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
>
> So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install w/
> no "server" services?
It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your system.
Try 'aptitude why apache2.2-bin', maybe it will shed some light on why
My laptop was off for about a week and when I fired it up today, I ran an
update and then an upgrade on my squeeze install and today I noticed this
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
apache2.2-bin bind9-host dnsutils gdm3 google-chrome-stable
solved this now. So simple in the end, simply removing the _'s from
the version field in /var/lib/dpkg/status fixed it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.or
(I must of been sleep deprived when I replied last month as I
inadvertantly replied directly to godo rather than the list as well)
/var/lib/available seems to be empty I noticed.
Removing virtualbox-2.1 from
/var/lib/dpkg/status doesn't make a difference. It seems it is a bug in
virtualbox-2.1, f
On 27 January 2011 09:37, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 07:13 +, Kelly Harding wrote:
>> hi
>>
>> have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
>>
>> dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
>
> [...]
>
>> Results in i
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 07:13 +, Kelly Harding wrote:
> hi
>
> have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
>
> dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
[...]
> Results in inability to upgrade any packages on the system.
> Anyone come
On 01/27/2011 08:13 AM, Kelly Harding wrote:
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
29666 package 'virtualbox-2.1':
error in Version string `2.1.4-42893_Debian_lenny': invalid character
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
29666 package 'virtualbox-2.1':
error in Version string `2.1.4-42893_Debian_lenny': invalid character
in revision number
exim4-config.postinst: [WARN]
On 2010-03-23 10:32, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
[snip]
Read the manpage - In a nutshell:
upgrade Deprecated
safe-upgradeUpgrade listed/all packages to newest version, don't
remove packages
"don't remove packages"
That's why OP is getting the failure. cvs and cvsnt c
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 15:25 +, John O Laoi wrote:
> > Why the mixed system?
> Apologies, I am using Squeeze. The Lenny CDs are commented out.
Important information - make sure to mention it next time.
> > cvsnt conflicts with cvs. You can't have both at the same time.
> Should I remove o
>>
>> The following is my sources.list:
>> $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
>> #
>> # deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.0 _Lenny_ - Official i386 NETINST
>> Binary-1 20090214-16:03]/ lenny main
>>
>> #deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.0 _Lenny_ - Official i386 NETINST
>> Binary-1 20090214-16:03]/ lenny main
On 2010-03-23 08:57, John O Laoi wrote:
Hello,
I am using Lenny.
When I try to upgrade, this is what happens:
# aptitude safe-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
[snip]
Resolving dependencies...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
cvsnt: Conflicts: cvs but 1:1.12.13-12
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 13:57 +, John O Laoi wrote:
> # aptitude safe-upgrade
[...]
> cvsnt: Conflicts: cvs but 1:1.12.13-12 is installed.
[...]
> Any ideas?
I assume that aptitude needs to remove a package in order to satisfy
other packages (cvsnt) dependencies/conflicts. Try "full-upgrade
Hello,
I am using Lenny.
When I try to upgrade, this is what happens:
# aptitude safe-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Reading task descriptions... Done
I upgraded today my testing:
Preparing to replace alsa-utils 1.0.16-2 (using
.../alsa-utils_1.0.19-2_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement alsa-utils ...
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old directory
`/etc/alsa/modprobe-post-install.d': Directory not empty
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old d
Meanwhile I wrote a bug report:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=513157
And if it is only to get an explanation for this behavior ;-)
Thank you.
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas.
Flo wrote:
>> there may again appear files in this directory. I would expect to see
>> there
>> files only in the case the "update" command is interrupted. But may be
>> something
>> is wrong with apt-get. Time to file a bug report?
>
> I definitely did this sometimes. Not recently though. I will
there may again appear files in this directory. I would expect to see there
files only in the case the "update" command is interrupted. But may be something
is wrong with apt-get. Time to file a bug report?
I definitely did this sometimes. Not recently though. I will observe the
behaviour of ap
Flo wrote:
>>
>> Also take a look into directory /var/lib/apt/lists/partial. There may
>> be left
>> some files. I had to remove them by hand.
>
> I found there more than 400 files, mainly diff files, but some others as
> well.
>
> Is it better to remove them???
>
> Flo.
>
This directory belon
Also take a look into directory /var/lib/apt/lists/partial. There may be left
some files. I had to remove them by hand.
I found there more than 400 files, mainly diff files, but some others as
well.
Is it better to remove them???
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.de
Flo wrote:
>>
>> I don't know the timing, but I wonder if it could be as simple as
>> mirror skew.
>>
>
> Probably you are right. I did the right thing at the wrong time. And
> spent hours on searching a problem which didn't exist.
>
> Nevertheless, thank you for your help.
>
> Flo.
>
>
Als
> >No, nothing special. I just have different sources in the menu.lst.
>
> Your GRUB configuration (/boot/grub/menu.lst) is an odd place to store apt
> sources. Don't you think the normal place (/etc/apt/sources.list) would
> be better? :)
>
Sorry, I was too stupid. I just had to edit menu.ls
On Friday 23 January 2009, Flo wrote about 'Re: Serious
aptitude upgrade problem':
>No, nothing special. I just have different sources in the menu.lst.
Your GRUB configuration (/boot/grub/menu.lst) is an odd place to store apt
sources. Don't you think the normal place (/et
I don't know the timing, but I wonder if it could be as simple as
mirror skew.
Probably you are right. I did the right thing at the wrong time. And
spent hours on searching a problem which didn't exist.
Nevertheless, thank you for your help.
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user
According to what you posted earlier today, apt doesn't know about
2007.dfsg.2-1 yet. Assuming you are on Lenny/Sid you might try "aptitude
update" to resolve that.
Or better: It doesn't know about 2007.dfsg.2-1 anymore. Because it did
know and downloaded the version.
aptitude update: T
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 04:04:28PM -0600, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
> On Thursday 2009 January 22 15:24:57 Flo wrote:
> >The second update must have confused it. How could it happen and, more
> >important, how can I fix this?
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure how that confused it, but it c
On Thursday 2009 January 22 15:24:57 Flo wrote:
>You are right! 2007.dfsg.2-1 is the uptodate version. 2007.dfsg.1-1 is
>the old version which is installed and should be upgraded.
According to what you posted earlier today, apt doesn't know about
2007.dfsg.2-1 yet. Assuming you are on Lenny/Sid
It looks like being installed but it isn't.
How do you know that 2007.dfsg.1-1 isn't what is actually installed? All
these seem to agree that it is what is installed. Could you do some sort of
sha1sum test to verify your version of the files shipped in this package
actually differ from the
On Thursday 2009 January 22 13:38:27 Flo wrote:
># aptitude upgrade
>No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
>
># dpkg -s texlive-doc-base
>Status: install ok installed
>Version: 2007.dfsg.1-1
>
># aptitude show texlive-doc-base
>State: installed
>Version
saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
In the meantime I got another package to install but all previously
downloaded packages are marked to be uptodate but they are not.
If I understand correctly: you mean that aptitude doesn't
Thanks for your email.
I am running debian testing and I did the following:
aptitude update
aptitude -d upgrade
Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
In the meantime I got another
ut instead of saying 'aptitude
> upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
>
> aptitude update
> aptitude upgrade
>
> In the meantime I got another package to install but all previously
> downloaded packages are marked to be uptodate but they are not.
If I underst
Flo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think I am running into a serious upgrade problem.
>
> I am running debian testing and I did the following:
>
> aptitude update
> aptitude -d upgrade
>
> Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
>
Hi,
I think I am running into a serious upgrade problem.
I am running debian testing and I did the following:
aptitude update
aptitude -d upgrade
Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgra
On 2009-01-05 17:42 +0100, Hugh Lawson wrote:
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
> A package failed to install. Trying to recover:
> Setting up udftools (1.0.0b3-14) ...
> Starting udftools packet writing:
> /dev/pktcdvd/0=/dev/hdc Device node '0' already in use
> invoke-rc.
On 2009-01-05 17:42 +0100, Hugh Lawson wrote:
> How do I troubleshoot this issue?
>
> 'aptitude upgrade' in lenny returned an error, which follows:
>
>
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> udftools
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code
How do I troubleshoot this issue?
'aptitude upgrade' in lenny returned an error, which follows:
Errors were encountered while processing:
udftools
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
A package failed to install. Trying to recover:
Setting up udftools (
On Sunday 22 June 2008 02:54:03 pm you wrote:
> On Sun June 22 2008, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
> > Glad to do it. In this case, it is NOT badly written packages, but
> > rather a design choice of Debian Multimedia to go with a lib that is
> > newer then stable or testing. You will run into this err
On Sunday 22 June 2008 01:49:37 pm you wrote:
> On Sun June 22 2008, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > See this line: >
> >
> > processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libswscale0_0.svn20080206-8_i386.deb
> > (--unpack):
> > trying to overwrite `/usr/lib/libswscale.so.0.5.0', which is also i
On Sun June 22 2008, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Consider removing the offending lib*cvs* packages from the
> debian-multimedia repository.
>
> > do I just wait for newer packages??
>
> See the instructions on http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
>
when I tried that I get:
Beware : downgrading to these pa
On Sunday 22 June 2008 09:37:05 am Paul Cartwright wrote:
> Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency h&ll..
> tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
>
> Preconfiguring packages ...
> (Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
> U
On 2008-06-22 15:37 +0200, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency h&ll..
> tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
>
> Preconfiguring packages ...
> (Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
> Unpackin
Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency h&ll..
tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libavutil49 (from .../libavutil49_0.svn20080206-8_i386.deb)
Daniel Burrows wrote the following on 01/30/2008 09:31 AM:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 11:51:35AM -0600, "Dennis G. Wicks" <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
>> Greetings;
>>
>> I am running aptitude upgrade after aptitude update and
>> everything
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 11:51:35AM -0600, "Dennis G. Wicks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Greetings;
>
> I am running aptitude upgrade after aptitude update and
> everything works fine up to a point.
>
> Everything is downloaded and after it starts
Greetings;
I am running aptitude upgrade after aptitude update and
everything works fine up to a point.
Everything is downloaded and after it starts the
installs I get messages like this. This is the first set.
> Preparing to replace util-linux 2.12r-19 (using
> .../util-linux
Javier Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When I configure apt.conf.d/proxy, then things work... I use apt-get
> and aptitude with sudo as a non root user. Might be the the
> environment variables are lost with sudo?
Exactly that. If you want to preserve them, you should add a line
with
De
On 10/25/07, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:51:44PM -0600, Javier Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > I've used http_proxy/ftp_proxy to enable apt-get to download packages
> > through a proxy server whenever required.
> >
> > However I've tri
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:51:44PM -0600, Javier Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> I've used http_proxy/ftp_proxy to enable apt-get to download packages
> through a proxy server whenever required.
>
> However I've tried the same environment variables with aptitude with
> no luck...
On 10/24/07, Javier Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've used http_proxy/ftp_proxy to enable apt-get to download packages
> through a proxy server whenever required.
>
> However I've tried the same environment variables with aptitude with
> no luck... Looks like aptitude doesn't pay a
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:51:44PM -0600, Javier Vasquez wrote:
> However I've tried the same environment variables with aptitude with
> no luck... Looks like aptitude doesn't pay attention to them. Does
> any one know how to overcome this? Also, I liked the environment
> variables solution beca
Hi,
I've used http_proxy/ftp_proxy to enable apt-get to download packages
through a proxy server whenever required.
However I've tried the same environment variables with aptitude with
no luck... Looks like aptitude doesn't pay attention to them. Does
any one know how to overcome this? Also, I
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 07:08:35AM +0200, Mauro Sacchetto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > Could you quote what aptitude actually output?
>
> debian:~# aptitude install -f kde/unstable
> Lettura della lista dei pacchetti in corso... Fatto
> Generazione dell'albe
Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Could you quote what aptitude actually output?
debian:~# aptitude install -f kde/unstable
Lettura della lista dei pacchetti in corso... Fatto
Generazione dell'albero delle dipendenze in corso... Fatto
Lettura delle informazioni sullo stato esteso
Inizializzazione dello st
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:45:34PM +0200, Mauro Sacchetto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> But aptitude install -f kde/unstable gives me this output:
>
> ==
> debian:~# aptitude install -f kde/unstable
> .
> .
> .
> The following packages were blocke
I'd like to upgrade some packages from testing to unstable
My configuration is the following one:
==
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
# Lenny [Testing]
deb http://ftp.it.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.it.deb
Luc Saffre wrote:
Hello,
`aptitude upgrade` suddenly tells me that a lot of packages have been
kept back. Is there an explanation to why this can happen? I did not ask
to keep them from being upgraded. I am on "testing" for some weeks now
and did already several successful `aptit
hi,
I've made a small deb repository which some specifics applications there. I'd
like to automatically install/upgrade the packages which belong to this
repository.
cat /etc/apt/sources.list
# cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://obsapt:/debian/ sarge main contrib non-free
deb http:/
Hi,
I had a similar problem yesterday and came across your post
while searching for a glue. There was no reply, so just in case..
I found something, might be a problem when using devfs and udev
at the same time with 2.6 kernel or something.
You might want to look at the following page
http://bu
Ibrahim Mubarak wrote on 2004-11-29 14:03:
By the way, what does obsolete packages mean in synoptic (could not find
anything about it in the help)? Is it like with aptitude? I preferred aptitude
over apt-get because it would remove useless packages whenever the dependencies
of main packages woul
--- ocl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I tried "aptitude install" for a few of them, especially capplets, eog,
> > totem, and
> libgnome2-0,
> > but aptitude tells me that 200+ pakages (mainly gnome-related, but not
> > exclusively as
> pkg-config
> > is among them!) are no longer used and will
Hi,
I am using Debian SID/unstable with both KDE and GNOME installed. Custom Kernel
2.6.9! For about a
week now I have been trying to update the packages I got on my system. But each
time I do it
(about daily) it does update some of the packages just fine but can't seem to
be able to do
anythin
> And dist-upgrade is for when you want to get all the new funky features.
> Which many of us do :-). It only breaks things if the packages uploaded
> by the maintainers are broken. Ok, that occasionally happens, which is
> why you don't use "dist-upgrade" on your production servers except with
>
On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 21:02, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 02:22:40AM -0500, dircha wrote:
>
> > An equally adequate reference is available as:
> > /usr/share/doc/aptitude/README
>
> ...which is not too hard to paste:
>
> aptitude dist-upgrade
>
> This command will also attempt
On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 02:22:40AM -0500, dircha wrote:
> An equally adequate reference is available as:
> /usr/share/doc/aptitude/README
...which is not too hard to paste:
aptitude dist-upgrade
This command will also attempt to upgrade packages, but it is more
aggressive about solving depe
cwinl wrote:
hi all,
i'm confused about several aptitude param.
thank you all.
I see that while dist-upgrade is documented in the aptitude
documentation, it is not mentioned in the manual page.
The aptitude manual page references the apt-get manual page ('man
apt-get'). I suggest you take a look
hi all,
i'm confused about several aptitude param.
thank you all.
--
P4/2.4B
ELSA 528/128
512MB DDR333
240GB
MSI 845PE
BenQ FP557s
Pioneer DVD-120A
LG GCE-8320B
--
http://www.cwinl.com/
http://forum.lnnu.edu.cn/
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:53:54 -0600
Nathan Malmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 09:59:30AM -0800, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> > All of the correct modules are being loaded, but when I attempt to
> > run"/etc/init.d/pcmcia start', the process just hangs, sitting at
> > this mes
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 09:59:30AM -0800, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> All of the correct modules are being loaded, but when I attempt to run
> "/etc/init.d/pcmcia start', the process just hangs, sitting at this
> message;
>
> Starting PCMCIA Services: Intel PCIC probe: Not Found
> using yenta_socket
t;, followed by "aptitude upgrade:, and this
is where things went down hill.
After dpkg/aptitude started installing the updated files, it got to
the "pcmcia-cs" updated file, and it promptly hung than machine. I
couldn't change screens 0x0003)
eth0: Xircom CardBus revision 3 at
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 02:44:12PM -0700, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:47:11 -0400
> ScruLoose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:13:57PM -0700, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> > > How do I keep from having this particular package downloaded?
> >
> > I suspect th
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:47:11 -0400
ScruLoose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:13:57PM -0700, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> > When I do my weekly update, I'm getting a maintained package that is
> > not numbered along side the package release(s), and it causing this
> > particular
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:13:57PM -0700, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> When I do my weekly update, I'm getting a maintained package that is not
> numbered along side the package release(s), and it causing this
> particular program to be downgraded every week.
>
> How do I keep from having this particu
When I do my weekly update, I'm getting a maintained package that is not
numbered along side the package release(s), and it causing this
particular program to be downgraded every week.
How do I keep from having this particular package downloaded?
Unfortunately, I use this particular package every
87 matches
Mail list logo
