When psusi says "please reassign it to there" what "there" is meant?
There are many packages for Xen:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=xen
none of which are named simply "xen".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubunt
# lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description:Ubuntu 12.04 LTS
Release:12.04
Codename: precise
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998494
There is a Debian bug about this, also:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=689136
and as best I can tell, the fix is to have 02-skip-install-patch skip
over building the emacs byte code for gforth.el as per
https://sources.debian.net/src/gforth/0.7.2%2Bdfsg1-1.1/debian/patches/02
Thank you for the clarification with regard to the differences between the
'dnsmasq' and 'dnsmasq-base' packages.
The pointer to the resolvconf documentation, however, is less on-point,
since my previous report makes reference already to the resolvconf
documentation. Clearly, this isn't a ques
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1398137 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1398137
Public bug reported:
I got this error message when doing apt-get dist-upgrade
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 12.04
Package: virtualbox-dkms 4.1.12-dfsg-2ubuntu0.6
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3
I mean of course that resolvconf documentation refers to using dns-
nameservers (not "dns-server" as I wrote above).
I've added this as affecting dnsmasq-base, too. I think this is, at
least, a documentation bug with regard to the interplay amongst
resolvconf and dnsmasq and their configuration f
The use of TRUNCATE_NAMESERVER_LIST_AFTER_LOOPBACK_ADDRESS=no is defined
in the resolvconf documentation.
However, the resolvconf documentation also says that one should be able
to use dns-server settings in /etc/network/interfaces
This inconsistency is frustrating: Is dnsmasq getting its DNS se
Public bug reported:
I was upgrading the hardware enablement stack and this popped up in the
crash reporter.
If the automatically-provided information isn't sufficient, I may try to
add more information. I'm not terribly fussed by this since kvm does
the trick for me with regard to virtual machi
Paul, I've offered a suggested workaround in
https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ca-
certificates/+question/79192
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1042040
Title:
Ubuntu doesn'
Do the trademark rules prohibit distributing an optional package that
modifies the certificate store for Firefox?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1042040
Title:
Ubuntu doesn't trust de
I wonder if this is the same as
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/952563
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/715594
Title:
Resume from suspend sometimes fails in lenovo
As expected, I face no problems in Precise resuming this X61 using
lubuntu.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/952563
Title:
blank display on thinkpad x201 after resume from suspend
To m
I have a slightly mor elaborate observation to offer. On our X61, I see
the behaviour that lyre describes in comment 10:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/952563/comments/10
I have two user accounts on the system. When resuming, I see the black
screen with cursor. I switch to
Marking wishlist bugs as "opinion" seems inconsistent with other
wishlist bug reports, so I'm changing this. I seem not to have
permission to set this as having Importance: Wishlist but that seems
entirely appropriate and so I would appreciate it if someone with
requisite access could mark it as s
Just stumbled across this bug attempting to do a hardy->lucid upgrade. I use
an approx proxy.
The error message is very uninformative, so I second Fionn's suggestion
above.
Why does this check the identity of the mirror in the first place--is
there not a chain of gpg signatures used to verify
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: update-manager
I would like to see a --download-only switch for do-release-upgrade, so
that the network-dependent part of an over-the-net upgrade can be
separated as much as possible from the local unpacking, configuration,
and installation of the upgrade
Bug still exists for Hardy. Same work-around as above fixes it.
--
libdbus-glib-1.so.2 required by newest Firefox 32 bit nightlies
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253430
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs ma
This fails for me under a fully up-to-date Hardy:
$ lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description:Ubuntu 8.04.4 LTS
Release:8.04
Codename: hardy
$ dpkg -l qemu
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-f/Unpacked/Fa
This for
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04.4 LTS
Release:8.04
with kernel
$ uname -a
Linux [hostname] 2.6.24-27-generic #1 SMP Wed Jan 27 23:54:28 UTC 2010 i686
GNU/Linux
--
hardy virtualbox-ose-modules missing virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.24-27-generic
https://bugs.launchp
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: virtualbox-ose
virtualbox will not start because the required kernel modules are
missing.
A search of
https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox-ose-modules/
or for
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.24-27-
I've tried it on four machines with 8.04 installed, two running 32-bit
installations, two running 64-bit installations. Only on the 64-bit
installations does the above type of crash happen. On the 32-bit
installations, a+ starts without that crash (I am unable yet to evaluate
whether the 32-bit i
Yes, this bug still exists in 8.04:
$ a+
A+
Copyright (c) 1990-2005 Morgan Stanley. All rights reserved.
This version is Release 4.20
*** glibc detected *** a+: free(): invalid next size (normal):
0x006e4a80 ***
=== Backtrace: =
/lib/libc.so.6[0x7fc7e753808a]
This would be nice. I had been making squashfs filesystems to mount in
a similar way (and then using UnionFS to put a copy-on-write layer over
it), but squashfs support isn't so widespread as tar support is, so I'd
like to routinely do this with tar files instead.
The linux.com link above is now
Any chance for Hardy packages as well?
--
POSE gets "hardware exception #3" on startup
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/173799
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https
24 matches
Mail list logo
