>
> On Sat, 15 Mar 1997 19:10:08 +0100 (MET) Michael Tempsch wrote:
>
> > Hi again, forgot something - ask the salesdroid to actually give you
> > some real service and dig out the information about what Matrox card it
> > is...
>
> I did do that shortly after I posted the original message
> > Randolph Chung has released a alpha-test version of a utility that
> > will convert .deb files to .rpm files.
> >
> > http://132.236.56.9/pages/rc42/program/martian.html
> >
> > And Debian's alien package can already install .rpm files.
>
> Randolph is a close friend of mine (I'm the maintai
> > Please note that having a single packaging standard won't give the
> > ability to `cross-install' packages. The distributions differ in the
> > filesystem layout, and in the way many services are implemented.
> >
> The big problem for me is that if the packaging systems converge then so
> wil
> > Great! Will it be aware of the different filesystem locations? Shouldn't
> > these really be built into a user-configurable list instead of
> > the packages themselves?
>
> Alien doesn't currently handle that. It's just too much work, and there's
> no way I could guarentee it'd be correct
What would be an appropriate command to the 'mirror' perl script
to get the files needed for i386 installations only (including sources)?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I think the answers to these questions are serious enough to decide
> > whether Debian linux will grow or die.
>
> Actually, they are serious enough to decide if some number of people will
> remove Debian from their systems and replace it with something else before
> the Debian maintainers the
> Debian 1.3 has shadow support built in, last I heard. It's just gone into
> testing. I agree you have to install a few packages to make it work in 1.2,
> but this is not a big deal.
Is there some philosophical problem with incorporating PAM as-is? It's
already pretty well tested... I don't see
> I'm going to finally ask this question.
>
> What is it that is so special about vi? Does it decompile programs or write
> them all by itself or leap tall buildings with a single bound?
It works from any keyboard, you don't need arrows, f-keys or other
unlikely stuff. You keep your hands on th
> Yes. Many have raised the issue of conflicts on install. The answer at this
> point is to run configure over and over. Each time it will install something
> that is needed to settle the conflicts. The problem is that the selected
> files aren't in dependant order. Hopefully the new project w
> You have to take the good with the bad.
Why?
> It would be nice to have a perfect
> linux distribution but it will never happen.
In that case it seems like the world would be a nicer place if
you could mix-n-match things from different distributions easily.
Unfortunately it isn't all that eas
> > Note that RedHat gets this right, at least on the initial install. They
> > prompt for groups of programs that generally would be chosen together
> > and hide the ugly details unless you ask to pick individual items.
> > It may be nice to individually pick every file on a unix distribution
> >
> It is generally agreed that any Unix user should be able to use
> vi, regardless of which editor he prefers to use regularly.
Apparently the people who generated the debian rescue disk don't agree
or the recent editor wars wouldn't have happened on this list.
> Which of the vi semi-
> > I learned vi under SysVr3 and SysVr4 and didn't see much difference
> > under Slackware/elvis. Vim does have some annoying differences but
> > I can't remember the specifics. Emacs with viper-mode is pretty
> > faithful too.
>
> Emacs emulating vi? The only good thing about emacs is that
> My needs might be better served if there were an easy way to instruct dpkg
> to install the binaries on a different filesystem, like a zip disk. There
> is probably a way to do this easily, but I haven't figured it out. Have to
> do links by hand? THe config files, and so on, should go in the
> > > It is generally agreed that any Unix user should be able to use
> > > vi, regardless of which editor he prefers to use regularly.
> >
> > Apparently the people who generated the debian rescue disk don't agree
> > or the recent editor wars wouldn't have happened on this list.
>
> The
> what does it matter if one editor is faster than another? Or if one
> is more powerful than any other? Nothing! The particular user has
> to be familiar with at least one editor in that way that _he_ can
> use it for his purposes.
The issue relevant to this group is: what editor should someo
One more idea to throw in the pot:
How about including smbfs in the base kernel and allowing installation
from a Win95 or NT share? Almost every office is going to have one
of those around where you can share out a CDROM with a couple of
mouse clicks. You could even do from with Windows-for-Work
> .deb is a very simple ar archive. You can use ar to display its
> contents and to extract data.tar.gz which contains the package,
> control.tar.gz contains the pre/post inst/rm scripts.
> (filenames from memory, might be called slightly different)
>
> > Using the universally (well, Unixversall
> >
> > I'd think the info-zip package would have been a better choice since you
> > can extract individual elements without uncomressing the whole mess and
> > you wouldn't need two layers of archiving.
> >
> I use the Midnight Commander for extracting single files from a *.deb
> file. I could p
> Finally, Debian could really benefit from a kind person riding up on
> a big white 30G drive and giving them a enough space to store
> a journal of older .deb files (maybe this already exists somewhere?),
> and optimized binary distributions for different intel processors.
> (Yes I know there is
> I was thinking about maybe an argument for diety so it can be added to
> cron.weekly to check for updated packages and *optionally* automatically
> download it with an email to root about the update including the
> description and dependancies. In addition add the ability to mark
> *specific* pac
> > Hmmm, This makes two straight that the infomagic folks have sent out with
> > a bad Debian distribution on it. Their December, 1996 LDR with the
> > original Debian 1.2.0 was also full of problems. Not to mention they
> > still haven't put anything about how to install Debian in the bookle
> > provide a consistency check for complete CD's, so that companies like
> > InfoMagic can easily check what they press. I have the impression the
>
> Eric, I suspect you are correct. I do have a tendancy to over-react to
> bad situations. What kind of consistency check would we need to
> pr
> Apparently, Linux doesn't have a driver for the Intel 82557-based PCI
> twisted-pair ethernet card. It looks as thought this is not the same
> as the EtherExpress Pro/10+ because it uses a different chip (the 82557).
> Does Linux 2.1.** have such a driver?
This is the Pro100B card and there is
> The other asnwers in this list are all very usefull, but sometimes
> I find that whatever I do, I cannot unmount for example /usr.
> In such cases, it's best to do
>
> mount -o remount,ro /usr
>
> i.e. remount it read-only, so that all data is written do the partition,
> and you can now safel
>
> One interesting (and encouraging) note is that Corel WordPerfect 7 comes
> with some utilities to do SGML. Haven't looked into it yet. :)
Has anyone used this feature? You have to supply your own dtd. Does
the one used by the linuxdoc project work and if so, how do you
set it up?
Les Mik
> > Kernel 2.0.30 changed the way it handles memory. It's supposed to be a
> > stable kernel (by this I'm saying it's a 2.0.x and not a 2.1.x), but
> > problems like this make me think it shouldn't be used in 1.3. Could you
> > try downgrading to 2.0.29 and let me (or the whole list) know if it
>
> Just replace stable with frozen in dselect and things should work fine. I
> upgraded by ftp over a ppp link (~39 MB) and it went as slick as can be
> (it took a few hours of course.)
>
> After struggling with two Red Hat upgrades and getting a system which
> worked but could only be upgraded
>
> I am trying to get my machine to use 2 3c509 ethernet cards
> booting from loadlin. Looking at the loadlin docs I think the
> command line should be:
>
> "loadlin vmlinuz root=/dev/hda1 ether=10,300,eth0 ether=11,310,eth1 ro"
>
> eth0 is fine but I don't get eth1 at all. There isn't
>
> I want to build a small network using Linux as the fileserver and
> windows 95 computers as the clients. What I have in mind is something
> similar to what novell network do, but using Linux in the place of the
> novell server. I want to be able to map a linux partition in the server
> t
> > This is EXACTLY the environment that UUCP was designed to operate in.
>
> My apologies then. Now it seems to me this was a dumb question :-)
>
> I'll start digging in how to configure my Debian boxes and sendmail
> to do the trick.
But times have changed a lot since the days when the only
32 matches
Mail list logo