Re: OpenOffice.org
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 11:45:00PM +0100, Rafael Rodríguez wrote: > OO 2.0 was supposed to have 64 bits support. I've tried to build the OO beta > in debian experimental with no success. Anyone has tried? See Pavel Janik's blog: http://blog.janik.cz/archives/2005-06-19T13_37_07.html Ryan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OpenOffice.org
OO 2.0 was supposed to have 64 bits support. I've tried to build the OO beta in debian experimental with no success. Anyone has tried? Regards, Rafael Rodríguez El Sábado, 25 de Junio de 2005 22:34, Marcin Dębicki escribió: > Pete kiedys napisal: > > Hi all, a quick and probably stupid question... > > > > I notice that OpenOffice.org is now listed in the packages in Sid for > > AMD64. > > > > Does this mean I can get rid of my chroot OpenOffice and use the real > > AMD64 one instead? > > > > Pete > > You should have installed ia32 libs. For more info read HOWTO for AMD64 > Debian port > -- > Registered Linux User 369908 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OpenOffice.org
Pete kiedys napisal: > Hi all, a quick and probably stupid question... > > I notice that OpenOffice.org is now listed in the packages in Sid for > AMD64. > > Does this mean I can get rid of my chroot OpenOffice and use the real > AMD64 one instead? > > Pete > > You should have installed ia32 libs. For more info read HOWTO for AMD64 Debian port -- Registered Linux User 369908 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnupg port or alternative
Many thanks Jean-Luc Le 25.06.2005 21:12:21, Kurt Roeckx a écrit : On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 05:33:01PM +, Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > Le 25.06.2005 18:50:26, Jacob Larsen a écrit : > >Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > >> I've seen in the "release notes" that there is a problem with gnupg. > >> Are there any plan to do the port of gnupg or is there any > gnupg 1.4.1-1.0.1 Was built in a wrong way. There is no problem with gnupg. Like it says, it was build wrong. It was build again, and therefor got a different version number, but the source is identical. The wrongly build version just had missing dependencies, you were able to install gnupg without libusb-0.1-4, which resulted in gnupg not working. The rebuild version just has the correct dependencies. Kurt pgpV96vkWydH9.pgp Description: PGP signature
OpenOffice.org
Hi all, a quick and probably stupid question... I notice that OpenOffice.org is now listed in the packages in Sid for AMD64. Does this mean I can get rid of my chroot OpenOffice and use the real AMD64 one instead? Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
initng
I've just installed initng and I have reported something I think strange. I can chroot (as usual using dchroot) but after: xhost +localhost and dchroot -d "firefox" I can see: (firefox-bin:6923): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display: dchroot: Child exited non-zero. dchroot: Operation failed. with /sbin/init there is no such problem. Had anyone issued it with initng? -- Registered Linux User 369908 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mythtv
Hello Benjamin, El sáb, 25-06-2005 a las 21:02 +0200, Van Laere Benjamin escribió: > Hi, > > Anyone had succes with MythTv? I can't get it to run natively (using > apt-get source mythtv -b), and when I run it in chroot, it can't > access /dev/video. If I recall correctly, MythTV triggered a bug in the threads implementation of glibc that AMD64 uses. Search this list's archives for the last two weeks for a patch that fixes the glibc bug. Greetings, -- Javier Kohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: gnupg port or alternative
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 05:33:01PM +, Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > Le 25.06.2005 18:50:26, Jacob Larsen a écrit : > >Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > >> I've seen in the "release notes" that there is a problem with gnupg. > >> Are there any plan to do the port of gnupg or is there any > gnupg 1.4.1-1.0.1 Was built in a wrong way. There is no problem with gnupg. Like it says, it was build wrong. It was build again, and therefor got a different version number, but the source is identical. The wrongly build version just had missing dependencies, you were able to install gnupg without libusb-0.1-4, which resulted in gnupg not working. The rebuild version just has the correct dependencies. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mythtv
Hi, Anyone had succes with MythTv? I can't get it to run natively (using apt-get source mythtv -b), and when I run it in chroot, it can't access /dev/video. Any idea? Benjamin Stop software patents! www.gnu.org www.linux.org Kot.unpeu.com - GnuPG key ID 0x73A37869 Thanks to avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: gnupg port or alternative
Le 25.06.2005 18:50:26, Jacob Larsen a écrit : Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > I've seen in the "release notes" that there is a problem with gnupg. > Are there any plan to do the port of gnupg or is there any alternative? What problems specifically? I don't use it that much, but it looks like it works for mail signing (otherwise please tell me). Just because I've read: http://amd64.debian.net/docs/package_changes.txt And seen: ### AMD64 - Package differences to Debian ### Compared to Debian i386, not counting binNMUs on i386 where all other arches are ### the same as AMD64. 1. Patched (binNMU) packages. - Package Our Version Reason syslinux2.11-0.1.0.1.pure64 #249506, #298940 linux86 0.16.14-1.2.0.1.pure64 #260647 gnupg 1.4.1-1.0.1 Was built in a wrong way. [ ... ] And I can see gnupg in this diff list of the packages in Debian i386 and AMD64. /Jacob Jean-Luc pgpFDD1AImx7k.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg port or alternative
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > I've seen in the "release notes" that there is a problem with gnupg. > Are there any plan to do the port of gnupg or is there any alternative? What problems specifically? I don't use it that much, but it looks like it works for mail signing (otherwise please tell me). /Jacob -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCvYtSiAWIAI3xXVYRAu/hAJ97d65A6C/l3+/qYs70Dgkx5AZ9IQCeO8Vx 1NIQ3ihq60X/Jj6mUIOWjD8= =1Hlr -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gnupg port or alternative
Hi, I've seen in the "release notes" that there is a problem with gnupg. Are there any plan to do the port of gnupg or is there any alternative? Regards Jean-Luc pgpVoKNViEfMk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dell SE2850 raid problem.
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 11:57:54AM +0200, Pawe? Krzaczkowski muttered these words: > I've recently bought Dell SE2850 and wanted to installl debian-amd64 on it. > As i read on this list the official debian installer is based on kernel > 2.6.8. This means the installer doesn't see my raid controller and im unable > to install debian system. I fund out that my raid controller is suportem > from kernel 2.6.9. My question is .. do you know any way i could install > debian 3.1r0a on my SE2850 ? http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/06/msg00444.html -- Eric Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Possibilities to receive $ and help the justice system
Very exciting profession. You can process from anywhere in the world. In business for yourself but not by yourself. You decide when you work. A substantial number of our associates are at 5,000US to 12,000US per mo. Excellent training and assistance. http://ed.f6.youngtallitemss.com/b/ Above for additional info or to discontinue receiving or to see our address. However irregular the motion might be, it was sure, if continued, to bring him to land in time, and that was all he cared about just then. When night fell his slumber was broken and uneasy, for he wakened more than once with a start of fear that the machine had broken and he was falling into the sea Sometimes he was carried along at a swift pace, and again the machine scarcely worked at all; so his anxiety was excusable -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dell SE2850 raid problem.
Hi. I’ve recently bought Dell SE2850 and wanted to installl debian-amd64 on it. As i read on this list the official debian installer is based on kernel 2.6.8. This means the installer doesn’t see my raid controller and im unable to install debian system. I fund out that my raid controller is suportem from kernel 2.6.9. My question is .. do you know any way i could install debian 3.1r0a on my SE2850 ? Thx for any advise. Pawel.
Re: [SOLVED?] Re: synaptics Touchpad and x.org
> > I am not really sure, if one can call this "Solved", because now your > > dependency tree will be broken and you won't be able to use > > apt-get/aptitude until you remove xfree86-driver-synaptics, right? That's > > the situation here for me anyways. > > Yes. This is true. There should be a package for xorg or this package > should depend on xfree or xorg. > > Do you think this is bugworthy? As far as my limited Debian knowledge takes me, xfree86-driver-synaptics depends on xserver-xfree86. But this is also provided by xserver-xorg, so there should not be any problems. So why does APT complain? It's surely not bugworthy in the sense of Debians bug tracking system, because the xorg packages are not official ones. I hope somebody on this list can help us anyways. Frank -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
