On Wednesday 24 January 2007 12:12, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:46:55AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> > On Monday 22 January 2007 12:10, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 10:29:00AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> > > > is the solution simply to wait u
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 11:58:34AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> On Saturday 27 January 2007 03:15, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > --
> > Chris.
> > ==
> > " ... The official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of
> > rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a governm
On Saturday 27 January 2007 03:15, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:12:44PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > use aptitude interactively and ':' will hold a package at its current
> > level. Also, '?' within apt-listbugs allows you to pin the packages,
> > but I've not trie
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:38:10PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:49:08PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:15:19AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:12:44PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > > use apt
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:49:08PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:15:19AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:12:44PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > use aptitude interactively and ':' will hold a package at its current
> > > leve
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:15:19AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:12:44PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > use aptitude interactively and ':' will hold a package at its current
> > level. also, '?' within apt-listbugs allows you to pin the packages,
> > but I've n
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:12:44PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> use aptitude interactively and ':' will hold a package at its current
> level. also, '?' within apt-listbugs allows you to pin the packages,
> but I've not tried it to determine the results.
That is a bit confusing because '?
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 17:30, tom arnall wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 January 2007 12:36, Stephen Cormier wrote:
> > On Wednesday 24 January 2007 15:46, tom arnall wrote:
> > > how do i 'hold' the packages. i can't find anything on this in either
> > > the apt-get doc' or on the web.
> >
> > echo
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:46:55 -0800
tom arnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> how do i 'hold' the packages. i can't find anything on this in either
> the apt-get doc' or on the web.
See here:
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-package.en.html#s-hold
--
Liam
--
To UNSUBSC
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 12:36, Stephen Cormier wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 January 2007 15:46, tom arnall wrote:
> > how do i 'hold' the packages. i can't find anything on this in either the
> > apt-get doc' or on the web.
>
> echo "package_name hold" | dpkg --set-selections
how did you find ou
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 15:46, tom arnall wrote:
> how do i 'hold' the packages. i can't find anything on this in either the
> apt-get doc' or on the web.
echo "package_name hold" | dpkg --set-selections
Stephen
--
GPG Pubic Key: http://users.eastlink.ca/~stephencormier/publickey.asc
pgp
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:46:55AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> On Monday 22 January 2007 12:10, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 10:29:00AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> >
> > > is the solution simply to wait until the repository deals w' the
> > > situation, or is the probl
On Monday 22 January 2007 12:10, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> I didn't read the beginning of the thread, but it looks like you're
> hijacking... :(
>
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 10:29:00AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> > i tried to upgrade this morning but got the following right after
> > fetching th
I didn't read the beginning of the thread, but it looks like you're
hijacking... :(
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 10:29:00AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> i tried to upgrade this morning but got the following right after fetching
> the
> stuff:
>
> Fetched 5428kB in 40s (133kB/s)
> Reading p
i tried to upgrade this morning but got the following right after fetching the
stuff:
Fetched 5428kB in 40s (133kB/s)
Reading package fields... Done
Reading package status... Done
Retrieving bug reports... Done
Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 22:18:29 +, djhack wrote:
> I am confused too. I got gimp from debian.org too. Each time I have
> updated gimp without any problems until now. Here are my results.
>
> apt-cash results:gimp:
> Installed: 2.2.6-1
> Candidate: 2.2.6-1
> Version Table:
> *** 2.2.6
I am confused too. I got gimp from debian.org too. Each time I have
updated gimp without any problems until now. Here are my results.
apt-cash results:gimp:
Installed: 2.2.6-1
Candidate: 2.2.6-1
Version Table:
*** 2.2.6-1 0
500 http://ftp.debian.org stable/main Packages
1
17 matches
Mail list logo
