On Monday 25 May 2009 12:05:57 am Christopher Chan wrote:
> The 64-bit version of sarg segfaults. There is a one line patch from
> 2007 that finally got rolled into a sarg-2.2.5-2 diff for the debian
> sarg package that fixes the problem I encountered. Could someone please
> update the sarg pack
I've attached a patch here [1] which fixes this too.
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/236769
--
Alessio Treglia
Ubuntu MOTU Developer | Homepage: http://www.alessiotreglia.com
0FEC 59A5 E18E E04F 6D40 593B 45D4 8C7C DCFC 3FD0
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lis
Am 25.05.2009 um 03:46 schrieb Christopher James Halse Rogers:
> Supporting package downgrades means
> supporting package downgrades in general, and this would require that
> package maintainers write back-conversion utilities where necessary.
... or to make a copy of the original settings just
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:12 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> > That is not the case with OpenSolaris based ZFS root capable
> > installations. While the whole disk maybe taken up by a zfs pool, the
> > installation will create three at least zfs filesystems. ROOT/,
> > ROOT/opt, export, and expo
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 07:58 +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 25/05/2009 alle 02.09 +0200, Markus Hitter ha scritto:
> >
> > Craft a system where people can switch back and forth between
> > different package versions. "This update broke foo?" -> Report a bug
> > and switch foo b
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Christopher James Halse Rogers
wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:12 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
>> That is not the case with OpenSolaris based ZFS root capable
>> installations. While the whole disk maybe taken up by a zfs pool, the
>> installation will create a
Christopher James Halse Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:12 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
>>> That is not the case with OpenSolaris based ZFS root capable
>>> installations. While the whole disk maybe taken up by a zfs pool, the
>>> installation will create three at least zfs filesy
>> Alternatively, replace Evolution with MySQL or such.
>>
>> This is what I understand to be the hard problem in *supporting* package
>> downgrades.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Ah, but this is no longer 'roll back' relevant. No fancy zapped file
> system will help there.
>
>
/me thinking of fr
Jan Claeys wrote:
> A lot of people run unstable during alpha & beta, but many do it in a VM
> or on an old spare system. That doesn't help find regressions that are
> hardware-related, of course, and in general those systems might not see
> the same sort of use that people's "main" computers see.
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 13:24 +0200, Remco wrote:
...
> Downgrade
> conversion is probably not feasible for any but the most popular
> packages.
I completely agree with your message. Of course, expecting every package
to provide a downgrade converter is unrealistic. On the other hand, how
often do p
Hi,
This would be of interest to Ubuntu developers.
Regards
Anil
-- Forwarded message --
From: Anil Gulecha
Date: Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Subject: Nexenta Core Platform 2 Released
To: Open Solaris , OpenSolaris
Announce
Hi,
The Nexenta team would like to announce the
On 25/05/09 21:01, Andrew Sayers wrote:
> Jan Claeys wrote:
>
>> A lot of people run unstable during alpha & beta, but many do it in a VM
>> or on an old spare system. That doesn't help find regressions that are
>> hardware-related, of course, and in general those systems might not see
>> the s
12 matches
Mail list logo
