Hi,
Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
no clue...I don't use apt to upgrade. :) Your not alone tho, there is a
existing bug report on this (#81365)...so any help you can give me to track
down what's going on would be appreciated. On all the boxes I have access
to I use dselect to manage my package
David Starner wrote:
I ran dselect, and lo and behold, checkmp3 appeared. A package
with the same name, similar version number (1.97.3 vs. 1.97.2),
same description and same maintainer as mp3check. This is bad -
should I file a bug on f.d.o, mp3check, checkmp3, or all the
above?
AFAIK,
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Michael Beattie wrote:
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 01:19:08AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 08:54:25AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
Um, why send such a message to a widely-read mailing-list?
As a joke...
Im damned curious.. what did
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Michael Beattie wrote:
It was meant as a joke... so go ahead :)
That's why I did not really complain about it ;-)
Im not sure why he encrypted to you though.
Yeah, I also thought that you should have received this ;-))
(because you asked for it, that is)
Ulf
Hi,
found something like this in my logs for every start of mc:
Sep 1 12:13:48 pkfp20 mc: /dev/gpmctl: No such file or directory
I wonder why. Maybe a bug in mc? In fact, /dev/gpmctl exists:
srwxrwxrwx1 root root0 Sep 1 12:16 gpmctl=
The '=' is an indication of the
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Martijn van de Streek wrote:
Sep 1 12:13:48 pkfp20 mc: /dev/gpmctl: No such file or directory
I wonder why. Maybe a bug in mc? In fact, /dev/gpmctl exists:
I got these too, with both mc and links. I guess it's a libgpm0-bug.
Installing (and running) gpm fixed it
Dale Scheetz wrote:
/usr/local/bin/pine not found
If I explicitly call /usr/bin/pine it works just fine.
I just checked on another user login, and no problems. This must be a bash
command caching artifact. I guess logging out will fix it...
hash -r would do it too.
Ulf
Anton Ivanov wrote:
If you are right at least apache scripts are not. I suggest you
file a bug against it.
If you know how to call apache scripts to demonstrate the error then
please file the bug yourself.
Check before, if you run an up-to-date apache.
apache starts up correctly
Anton Ivanov wrote:
apache starts up correctly for me on every system boot, and I do have
/bin/sh pointing to /bin/ash as well.
My fault. It actually uses #!/bin/bash which it should not anyway
Well, #!/bin/bash scripts are allowed to use bashisms :)
Ulf
Hi,
I'm reading my system documentation with dwww. However, with current
potato/woody versions of dwww and file I have trouble for some files
(i.e the web server hangs and reports a timeout)
Examples for bad files are
Hi,
I noticed that more and more packages move their doc files to /usr/share/doc,
leaving all kinds of problems with the old one, e.g. empty directories,
broken links, directories with only one file, ...
Did I miss the final say on this? Where was it announced? And should I do
this for my
Joey Hess wrote:
I noticed that more and more packages move their doc files to
/usr/share/doc,
leaving all kinds of problems with the old one, e.g. empty directories,
broken links, directories with only one file, ...
File bug reports for all of these things. Any packages exhibiting
Hi,
where should 'ps' reside, according to the standard?
In the latest version it moved from /bin/ps to /usr/bin/ps.
Thanks,
Ulf
--
#include signature
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Hi,
just recently I installed gnuchess-book and gnuchess.
I used something like 'dpkg -i gnuchess-book_* gnuchess_*'.
When the packages were configured I got the message: 'note the
disappearence of gnuchess-book, which has been completely
replaced'. In fact, there's no sign of gnuchess-book
Hello,
I installed the latest version of elvis and noticed, that
nvi is no longer the default vi (which is set up by
update-alternatives --auto vi). Instead, elvisnox is the
current default.
Is this correct or is it a bug?
Where can I read about alternative packages (and especially
which
Hello,
when I use dpkg-source on an unchanged source tree it complains
about unrepresentable changes. dpkg-buildpackage exits with an
error code.
Is this a bug or a feature? How can I circumvent it?
Thanks,
Ulf
--
#include signature
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail
16 matches
Mail list logo