On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 1:56 PM, wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 01:38:06PM -0800, Dan Hitt wrote:
>> I'm trying to build some software, and one of the long list of items
>> to install prior to configuring is 'alsa-lib'.
>>
>> I tried
>> 'su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 01:38:06PM -0800, Dan Hitt wrote:
> I'm trying to build some software, and one of the long list of items
> to install prior to configuring is 'alsa-lib'.
>
> I tried
> 'sudo apt-get install alsa-lib'
> but got the message
>
Hi,
have a look at
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/alsa-lib
To the lower left is a list of links titled "binaries". Those are the
readily installable packages which stem from source package "als-lib":
https://packages.debian.org/source/stretch/alsa-lib
Normally you don't build from source pac
On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 01:38:06PM -0800, Dan Hitt wrote:
> I'm trying to build some software, and one of the long list of items
> to install prior to configuring is 'alsa-lib'.
>
> I tried
> 'sudo apt-get install alsa-lib'
> but got the message
> 'E: Unable to locate package alsa-lib'
>
I'm trying to build some software, and one of the long list of items
to install prior to configuring is 'alsa-lib'.
I tried
'sudo apt-get install alsa-lib'
but got the message
'E: Unable to locate package alsa-lib'
So i looked around on the internet, and saw a page for an alsa-lib
package
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 07:55:50AM -0700, Horatio Leragon wrote:
> > Quite unlikely, but linux-image-3.2.0.5-amd64 could happen.
>
> OMG, 3.2.0.5 is considered an upgrade over 3.2.0.4?
5 is bigger than 4, so yes a higher version means it has been upgraded
> I was under the impression that 3.3 wa
From: Andrei POPESCU
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 11:47 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
> I'd suggest you don't try upgrading to another release u
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 8:51 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 05/29/2014 07:49 AM, Horatio Leragon wrote:
>>
>> During installation of Debian 7.5, one is prompted to install either
>>
>> linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64
>> or
>> linux-image-amd64
>>
>> There is no context-sensitive help menu on that page.
>>
From: The Wanderer
To: "debian-user@lists.debian.org"
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
> It is. 3.2.0-5 would be a very small upgrade over 3.2
From: The Wanderer
To: "debian-user@lists.debian.org"
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
Thanks, Wanderer, for your detailed explanation :)
On Jo, 29 mai 14, 07:55:50, Horatio Leragon wrote:
>
> > Quite unlikely, but linux-image-3.2.0.5-amd64 could happen.
>
> OMG, 3.2.0.5 is considered an upgrade over 3.2.0.4?
Not quite an upgrade, but a significant (usually security) change.
Significant enough to force an ABI break. That is, if
On Thursday 29 May 2014 16:07:04 The Wanderer wrote:
> The official Debian repositories are each named after a Debian release
> (by codename, not by number).
Not only by release name, but also by generic name. Hence the repositories
for Wheezy are either Wheezy or Stable, but never 7.x.
Lisi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/29/2014 10:53 AM, Horatio Leragon wrote:
[that on 2014-05-29 at 22:29, Andrei POPESCU wrote:]
>>> "linux-image-amd64" is a metapackage which always depends on the
>>> latest amd64 linux kernel.
>
>> ... for the given release (e.g. stable, b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/29/2014 10:55 AM, Horatio Leragon wrote:
[that on 2014-05-29 at 22:29, Andrei POPESCU wrote:]
>> Quite unlikely, but linux-image-3.2.0.5-amd64 could happen.
>
> OMG, 3.2.0.5 is considered an upgrade over 3.2.0.4?
>
> I was under the impress
From: Andrei POPESCU
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
> Quite unlikely, but linux-image-3.2.0.5-amd64 could happen.
From: Andrei POPESCU
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
>> "linux-image-amd64" is a metapackage which alway
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/29/2014 10:17 AM, Horatio Leragon wrote:
[that on 2014-05-29 at 20:51, The Wanderer wrote:]
>> linux-image-amd64 depends on whatever the latest-in-Debian AMD64
>> version of the Linux kernel is. If you install this package from
>> Debian stab
On Jo, 29 mai 14, 07:17:24, Horatio Leragon wrote:
>
> How likely, do you think, is Debian to release version 3.3?
Quite unlikely, but linux-image-3.2.0.5-amd64 could happen.
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers
On Jo, 29 mai 14, 13:02:57, Darac Marjal wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 04:49:59AM -0700, Horatio Leragon wrote:
> >During installation of Debian 7.5, one is prompted to install either
> >linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64
> >or
> >linux-image-amd64
> >There is no context-sensitive hel
From: The Wanderer
To: Debian-user List
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
> linux-image-amd64 depends on whatever the latest-in-Debian AMD64 version of
&g
From: Darac Marjal
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: What is the difference between linux-image-amd64 and
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64?
> "linux-image-amd64" is a metapackage which always d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/29/2014 07:49 AM, Horatio Leragon wrote:
> During installation of Debian 7.5, one is prompted to install either
>
> linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64
>
> or
>
> linux-image-amd64
>
> There is no context-sensitive help menu on that page.
>
> Could
"dep: linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64" -
https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/linux-image-amd64
linux-image-amd64 is a meta-package, that installs
linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64.
If you install the meta-package, I guess an update of the meta-package
will replace linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64, if there should be a
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 04:49:59AM -0700, Horatio Leragon wrote:
>During installation of Debian 7.5, one is prompted to install either
>linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64
>or
>linux-image-amd64
>There is no context-sensitive help menu on that page.
>Could someone tell me what the dif
During installation of Debian 7.5, one is prompted to install either
linux-image-3.2.0.4-amd64
or
linux-image-amd64
There is no context-sensitive help menu on that page.
Could someone tell me what the differences between those two are and which is
the better of the two?
On Friday, August 31, 2012 7:30:02 PM UTC-5, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > wow - i'm disappointed no one's ever answered this... i too would like to
> > know:
> > root:~/# ls -o /usr/bin/X*
> > -rwsr-sr-x 1 root9232 Dec 16 2011 /usr/bin/X
> > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 1889472 Oct 29 2011 /usr/bin/Xorg
> >
Le Sam 1 septembre 2012 1:32, bobg.h...@gmail.com a écrit :
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:30:02 PM UTC-5, jiang lei wrote:
>
>> is there any difference between "/usr/bin/X" and "/usr/bin/Xorg"?
>> On my >debian box, /usr/bin/X is not symlink to /usr/bin/Xorg, and i
>> can start X server >with
bobg.h...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:30:02 PM UTC-5, jiang lei wrote:
> > is there any difference between "/usr/bin/X" and "/usr/bin/Xorg"?
> > On my >debian box, /usr/bin/X is not symlink to /usr/bin/Xorg, and
> > i can start X server >with /usr/bin/X but fail with /usr/bin/Xo
On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:30:02 PM UTC-5, jiang lei wrote:
> is there any difference between "/usr/bin/X" and "/usr/bin/Xorg"? On my
> >debian box, /usr/bin/X is not symlink to /usr/bin/Xorg, and i can start X
> server >with /usr/bin/X but fail with /usr/bin/Xorg? i google it but find
> n
hi all:
is there any difference between "/usr/bin/X" and "/usr/bin/Xorg"? On my
debian box, /usr/bin/X is not symlink to /usr/bin/Xorg, and i can start X
server with /usr/bin/X but fail with /usr/bin/Xorg? i google it but find
nothing, could any one here help me? thanks in advance.
On 2011-03-09 21:03 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
>> Since this is no longer possible, you should run
>> "dpkg --clear-selections" prior to "dpkg --set-selections" to replicate
>> an installation on another computer.
>
> Yeah, this is a good advice. I will do this, and play a little bit around
>
> Since this is no longer possible, you should run
> "dpkg --clear-selections" prior to "dpkg --set-selections" to replicate
> an installation on another computer.
>
> Sven
Yeah, this is a good advice. I will do this, and play a little bit around with
this. Thank you for discussing this with me
On 2011-03-09 20:40 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
> It is not a great problem, but I wondered, why non-installed packages
> appeared
> as to be installed.
Because they have been selected for installation (dselect sometimes
"helpfully" does that automatically when you run it as root).
> When I
> |
> | Get list of package selections, and write it to stdout. Without a
> | pattern, non-installed packages (i.e. those which have been
> | previously purged) will not be shown.
>
Yes, of course I read this. But I thoughtm, the asterisk would mark ANY
pattern, and no asterisk
On 2011-03-09 20:24 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2011-03-09 19:59 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
>
>> I wondered what is the difference between
>>
>> a) dpkg --get-selections "*" > mylist.txt
>> and
>> b) dpkg --get-selections >
On 2011-03-09 19:59 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
> I wondered what is the difference between
>
> a) dpkg --get-selections "*" > mylist.txt
> and
> b) dpkg --get-selections > mylist.txt
This is mentioned in the dpkg manpage:
,
| --get-selections [package-na
Am Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 schrieb Camaleón:
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 19:59:30 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
> > I wondered what is the difference between
> >
> > a) dpkg --get-selections "*" > mylist.txt and
> > b) dpkg --get-selections > mylist.txt
> &
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 19:59:30 +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
> I wondered what is the difference between
>
> a) dpkg --get-selections "*" > mylist.txt and
> b) dpkg --get-selections > mylist.txt
>
> I get different results, but the asterix is a joker, and the
Hello list,
I wondered what is the difference between
a) dpkg --get-selections "*" > mylist.txt
and
b) dpkg --get-selections > mylist.txt
I get different results, but the asterix is a joker, and the results should be
the same. The manual did not mention the asterix, and I
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 09:33:16PM -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> While running cfdisk, it lists various file system types. Is there a
> document which explains the difference between similar file systems?
>
> In particular, if I want to have a windows XP type of filesystem, do I go
> wit
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 21:33:16 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> While running cfdisk, it lists various file system types. Is there a
> document which explains the difference between similar file systems?
It should be... but I have found nothing but excerpts:
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partiti
Le dimanche 22 août, Memnon Anon écrivit :
> Kamaraju S Kusumanchi writes:
>
> > Interesting! I searched for
> > difference between "w95 FAT32" and "w95 FAT32 (LBA)"
> > in google. All the results are pretty useless. What did you search for?
>
> "w95 fat32 w95 fat32 lba cfdisk"
> So I only adde
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi writes:
> Interesting! I searched for
> difference between "w95 FAT32" and "w95 FAT32 (LBA)"
> in google. All the results are pretty useless. What did you search for?
"w95 fat32 w95 fat32 lba cfdisk"
So I only added cfdisk and my hit is there on the first page.
> thanks. T
Memnon Anon wrote:
> Kamaraju S Kusumanchi writes:
>
>> While running cfdisk, it lists various file system types. Is there a
>> document which explains the difference between similar file systems?
> [...]
>> Similarly, If I want to create FAT32 partition so that I can exchange
>> files between w
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi writes:
> While running cfdisk, it lists various file system types. Is there a
> document which explains the difference between similar file systems?
[...]
> Similarly, If I want to create FAT32 partition so that I can exchange files
> between windows and Linux, should I
While running cfdisk, it lists various file system types. Is there a
document which explains the difference between similar file systems?
In particular, if I want to have a windows XP type of filesystem, do I go
with "07 HPFS/NTFS" or "86 NTFS volume set" or "87 NTFS volume set"?
Similarly, If
I am configuring a Senao 2511 wireless card (prism2.5 chipset) and keep
bumping into descriptions of both the hostap and linux-wlan(-ng) drivers for
the chipset. what is the difference?
tom arnall
arcata
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe"
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
I favor Seamonkey (Mozilla suite replacement):
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
over Firefox for one reason:
When you use a login page to something, and nowadays there are zillions,
in FF you *seem* to have to enter the userid first and FF will supply
the passw
Marc Shapiro wrote:
> Actually, I use fvwm2.
I see ... you are one of those ... ;-)
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
Home is where ~/.bashrc is.
Matej Cepl wrote:
Marc Shapiro wrote:
I am working on removing the last vestiges of KDE from my box, which will
eliminate Konqueror, as well.
Just curious (really -- no flame intended), why do you switch from KDE and
where (Gnome?)?
Actually, I use fvwm2. I have never really liked
> I favor Seamonkey (Mozilla suite replacement):
> http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
I did a search for Seamonkey in aptitude and it did not show
any packages. Is it not in Debian.org ftp for aptitude yet?
___
Join Excite! - http://www.e
Marc Shapiro wrote:
> I am working on removing the last vestiges of KDE from my box, which will
> eliminate Konqueror, as well.
Just curious (really -- no flame intended), why do you switch from KDE and
where (Gnome?)?
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http
Pollywog wrote:
I have found that I need three browsers to be able to view/play the most
content.
Most sites render well in Firefox and Konqueror but Konqueror sometimes will
not play video or sound clips when Firefox 'knows' how to bring up the app
that plays the media. I have Opera and I
On Saturday 29 July 2006 14:02, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> J F wrote:
> > Mozilla or firefox package-what is the difference?
> >
> > I guess I'm a little confused about which one is better/newer or
> > the one to use?
>
> I favor Seamonkey (Mozilla suite
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> J F wrote:
>
>> Mozilla or firefox package-what is the difference?
>>
>> I guess I'm a little confused about which one is better/newer or
>> the one to use?
>>
>
> I favor Seamonkey (Mozilla suite replacement):
> http://
J F wrote:
Mozilla or firefox package-what is the difference?
I guess I'm a little confused about which one is better/newer or
the one to use?
I favor Seamonkey (Mozilla suite replacement):
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
over Firefox for one reason:
When you use a login pa
J F wrote:
> Mozilla or firefox package-what is the difference?
>
> I guess I'm a little confused about which one is better/newer or
> the one to use?
* 'mozilla' and 'mozilla-browser' - original Mozilla, it is now
considered obsolete and is rep
Mozilla or firefox package-what is the difference?
I guess I'm a little confused about which one is better/newer or
the one to use?
Thanks in advance,
J
___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
-
adduser(8) states that
With the --disabled-login option, the account will be created but
will be disabled until a password is set. The --disabled-password
option will not set a password, but login are still possible for
example through SSH RSA keys.
I wonder what is the
begin Jerome BENOIT quote from Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 12:42:23PM +0300
> Hello List,
>
> I have just tried to install vim-gnome (sid):
> for that you neede vim 1:6.2 (unstable)
>
> My point is: if in my `/etc/apt/preference/' file
> I ask to fetch the `vim' package from `Sid',
> I do not get it wi
begin Jerome BENOIT quote from Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 11:38:37AM +0300
> Thank for the reply.
>
>
>
> >
> >Apt only knows what it is told about distributions/sources through their
> > Release file. My Release file for unstable/main has:
> >Archive: unstable
> >Component: main
> >Origin: Debian
>
Thank for the reply.
Apt only knows what it is told about distributions/sources through their
Release file. My Release file for unstable/main has:
Archive: unstable
Component: main
Origin: Debian
Label: Debian
Architecture: i386
so those are the only distinguishing factors that I can use to
le
reaches both `Sid' and `unstable'.
So what is the difference between `Sid' and `unstable' ?
Sid doesn't exist, sid and unstable do. sid and unstable different
names for the same thing.
I know that,
how explain the above trouble.
Apt only knows what it is told a
; and `unstable'.
So what is the difference between `Sid' and `unstable' ?
Sid doesn't exist, sid and unstable do. sid and unstable different
names for the same thing.
I know that,
how explain the above trouble.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 01:44:30PM +0300, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> I know that,
> how explain the above trouble.
Include one or the other, not both?
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :
`. `'` proud Debian admin and user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 12:42:23PM +0300, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Note that my `/etc/apt/sources.list' data file
> reaches both `Sid' and `unstable'.
>
> So what is the difference between `Sid' and `unstable' ?
S
from `unstable',
I get it !
Note that my `/etc/apt/sources.list' data file
reaches both `Sid' and `unstable'.
So what is the difference between `Sid' and `unstable' ?
Thanks,
jerome
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gt; >
> > I am also not able to get Ximian Gnome to install on Woody. (Using
> > either of the two methods -- script and *.deb packages).
> >
> > What is the difference between the Woody supplied Gnome and Ximian
> > Gnome?
> Having used both, ximian gnome
> I would just install the debian gnome packages if you are using woody.
But I feel Nautilus in Ximian will add lot of good looks to the desktop,
which does not come otherwise. Though it takes about 35MB of memory, I
still like it.
-Ramesh
ve to resort to "spamming" the Debian-user
mailing list until I am off the list, as all the e-mails I am STILL
receiving are now spam to me.
-Original Message-
From: Scott Henson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 2:46 PM
To: debian-user
Subject: Re: What is the
On Fri, 2002-03-22 at 09:45, Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> If I install Woody, it appears that I get an installation of Gnome.
>
> I am also not able to get Ximian Gnome to install on Woody. (Using
> either of the two methods -- script and *.deb packages).
>
> What is the diff
If I install Woody, it appears that I get an installation of Gnome.
I am also not able to get Ximian Gnome to install on Woody. (Using
either of the two methods -- script and *.deb packages).
What is the difference between the Woody supplied Gnome and Ximian
Gnome?
Randy
>
> So, instead of looking at Debian as a bunch of interesting packages
> running on top of a kernel, I should view each release as a stable set
> of packages that all are known to work together. And that to get a
> release (such as Woody) ready for release this involves:
>
> * Release/Instal
On Sat, 2002-03-09 at 23:13, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> On 10-Mar-2002 Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> > I have started reading details about Woody. (I am running Potato on all
> > of my machines with the 2.4 kernel).
> >
> > I was surprise to see that the 2.4 kernel is "optional". This leads me
>
On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 10:13:27PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> On 10-Mar-2002 Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> > I have started reading details about Woody. (I am running Potato on all
> > of my machines with the 2.4 kernel).
> >
> > I was surprise to see that the 2.4 kernel is "optional". This
On 10-Mar-2002 Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> I have started reading details about Woody. (I am running Potato on all
> of my machines with the 2.4 kernel).
>
> I was surprise to see that the 2.4 kernel is "optional". This leads me
> to a fundamental question... What makes Woody different?
>
> Are t
I have started reading details about Woody. (I am running Potato on all
of my machines with the 2.4 kernel).
I was surprise to see that the 2.4 kernel is "optional". This leads me
to a fundamental question... What makes Woody different?
Are there structure changes (layout, etc.) that are incompat
On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 09:33:02AM -0800, joseph de los santos wrote:
>
> what is the difference between frozen, potato, and unstable. arent they
> all the same?
"potato", as well as "slink" and "woody", are code names for the various
Debian releases.
joseph de los santos wrote:
> hello
>
> what is the difference between frozen, potato, and unstable. arent they
> all the same?
frozen=potato, upcoming stable
unstable=woody
Regards,
Joey
--
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
hello
what is the difference between frozen, potato, and unstable. arent they
all the same?
80 matches
Mail list logo
