On Friday 15 January 2016 13:26:09 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:44:07 -0600
>
> David Wright wrote:
> >On Thu 14 Jan 2016 at 20:33:45 (-0700), Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> >> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500 Gene Heskett
wrote:
> >> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:44:07 -0600
David Wright wrote:
>On Thu 14 Jan 2016 at 20:33:45 (-0700), Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500 Gene Heskett
>> wrote:
>> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 + Lisi R
On Thu 14 Jan 2016 at 20:33:45 (-0700), Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500 Gene Heskett wrote:
> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> >> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 + Lisi Reisz
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500
Gene Heskett wrote:
>On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +
>>
>> Lisi Reisz wrote:
>> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann K
On Thursday 14 January 2016 22:19:16 dean wrote:
> On 01/15/16 12:37, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> For what its worth, as root, an apt-get update, followed by an
> >> apt-get upgrade reports 0 package to upgrade.
> >>
> >> The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update,
> >>
On Friday 15 January 2016 02:37:49 Gene Heskett wrote:
> > The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update,
> > followed by apt-get dist-upgrade show? upgrade on its own does not
> > upgrade all packages. It skips kernel and some other stuff. Perhaps
> > that accounts for the diff
On 01/15/16 12:37, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> For what its worth, as root, an apt-get update, followed by an
>> apt-get upgrade reports 0 package to upgrade.
>>
>> The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update,
>> followed by apt-get dist-upgrade show? upgrade on its own do
On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +
>
> Lisi Reisz wrote:
> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote:
> >> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +
Lisi Reisz wrote:
>On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote:
>> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
>>
On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote:
> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
> > >> Synaptic runs on your box?
> > >> Years ago, when I tried it,
On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:44:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
> From that it would appear aptitude is confused at best, broken at worst.
Neither. It just works differently. They used all to use different databases
to some extent, or anyhow to be unmixable, but they are now mixable.
Why is everything
On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote:
> On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
> >> Synaptic runs on your box?
> >> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on
> >> startup use aptitude. It
On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
>
>> Synaptic runs on your box?
>> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on startup
>> use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable...
>
> Back on list where it belongs.
>
>
On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
> Synaptic runs on your box?
> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on startup
> use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable...
Back on list where it belongs.
I just ran it, and its obvious it doesn't reference the sa
Synaptic runs on your box?
Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on startup
use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable...
On Thursday 14 January 2016 11:33:10 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:43:53 Johann Klammer wrote:
> > On 01/14/2016 04:00 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > Greetings all;
> > >
> > > Intermittently but sometimes several times an hour from the times
> > > recorded. The error portion
On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:43:53 Johann Klammer wrote:
> On 01/14/2016 04:00 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Greetings all;
> >
> > Intermittently but sometimes several times an hour from the times
> > recorded. The error portion of the logged line:word wrapped
> >
> > segfault at 0 ip b7614966 sp
On 01/14/2016 04:00 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Greetings all;
>
> Intermittently but sometimes several times an hour from the times
> recorded. The error portion of the logged line:word wrapped
>
> segfault at 0 ip b7614966 sp bf9b64c8 error 6 in
> libc-2.13.so[b759b000+15e000
>
> No clue what
Greetings all;
Intermittently but sometimes several times an hour from the times
recorded. The error portion of the logged line:word wrapped
segfault at 0 ip b7614966 sp bf9b64c8 error 6 in
libc-2.13.so[b759b000+15e000
No clue what an error 6 means. No errors shown in the man page, just mild
19 matches
Mail list logo
